HV 


H+    ;  Rule  of 

"Not  Too  Much" 


H.  E.  O.  Heinemann 


GIFT  OF 
Prof.   M.   E.   Jaffa 


The  Rule  of 


"Not  Too 


Being  a  Collection  of  Articles  Written  During 

the  Past  Few  Years  in  Discussing 

the  Principle  of 

TEMPERANCE 

With  Special  Reference  to  the  Use  of  Fermented 
Beverages 


"The  rule  of  'not  too  much*  by  temperance  taught." 

—Paradise  Lost. 


BY 

H.  E.  O.  HEINEMANN 


Cfjuajjo 

145  Lasalle  Street 
190ft 


ayav 
Medium  tenuere  bead. 

The  first  physicians  by  debauch  were  made. 
Excess  began  and  sloth   sustains  the  trade. 

—  DRYDEN. 

Now,  if  the  temperate  life  is  such  a  happy  one,  if  its  name 
is  so  beautiful  and  lovable,  if  the  possession  of  it  is  so 
certain  and  so  secure,  there  is  nothing  left  for  me  to  do 
except  to  entreat  ....  every  man  endowed  with  gentle 
soul  and  gifted  with  rational  faculties,  to  embrace  this,  the 
richest  treasure  of  life;  for  as  it  surpasses  all  the  other 
riches  and  treasures  of  this  world  by  giving  us  a  long  and 
healthy  life,  so  it  deserves  to  be  loved,  sought  after,  and 
preserved  always  by  all.  —  LOUIS  CORNARO. 

True  modesty  lies  in  the  entire  absence  of  thought  upon 
the  subject.  —  T.  H.  LEWIN. 

'Tis  in  ourselves  that  we  are  thus  or  thus.  Our  bodies 
are  gardens,  to  the  which  our  wills  are  gardeners,  so  that 
if  we  will  plant  nettles  or  sow  lettuce,  set  hyssop  and  weed 
up  thyme,  supply  it  with  one  gender  of  herbs  or  distract  it 
with  many,  either  to  have  it  sterile  with  idleness  or  man- 
ured with  industry,  why,  the  power  and  corrigible  authority 
of  this  lies  in  our  wills  .....  We  have  reason  to  cool  our 
raging  motions,  our  carnal  stings,  our  unbitted  lusts.  — 
OTHELLO. 

Men  see  clearly,  like  owls,  in  the  night  of  their  own 
notions;  but,  in  experience,  as  in  the  daylight,  they  wink  and 
are  but  half-sighted.  —  BACON. 

Qui  admonent  amice  docendi  sunt,  qui  inimice  insectantur, 
repellendi.  —  CICERO. 


ri 


WHY? 


The  present  year  is  the  centennial  oi  the  organized 
temperance  movement  in  America. 

It  is  also  a  time  of  extraordinary  agitation  against 
the  use  of  alcoholic  drink. 

There  is  thus  both  reason  and  occasion  for  the 
publication  of  some  articles  by  which  it  has  been 
intended  to  place  the  so-called  drink  question  in  a 
rational  light  before  the  American  people. 

In  the  course  of  the  last  four  years  the  drink  ques- 
tion has  been  discussed  in  many  of  its  aspects  by  the 
writer  in  the  AMERICAN  BREWERS'  REVIEW  under  the 
heading  "From  the  Growler." 

While  written  for  a  publication  which  is  frankly 
devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  brewing  trade,  the 
articles  have  been  kept  strictly  within  the  limits  of 
actual  scientific  knowledge  and  reasonable  inference, 
all  exaggerations  or  unwarranted  conclusions  being 
carefully  avoided. 

It  can  be  safely  claimed  that  the  views  contained 
in  these  articles  represent  the  vast  preponderance  of 
opinion  of  men  of  science,  sociologists,  settlement 
workers,  economists,  moralists  and  philanthropists, 
the  world  over. 


Ever  since  the  doctrine  of  universal  total  ab- 
stinence killed  the  American  temperance  movement 
about  fifty  years  ago — which  up  to  that  time  had  made 
good  progress,  jts  principle  being  the  temperate  use 
of  fer'tne^itieji  beverages — the  whole  drink  question  has 
been  discussed  on  a  false  basis,  and  the  public  mind 
/".  has;  IreelV  filled  with  a  phantasmagoria  generated  in 
the  unhealthy  imagination  t>f  zealots,  until  today  the 
country  is  overspread  with  a  wholly  false  and  un- 
wholesome moral  atmosphere  in  regard  to  the  drink 
question,  so-called. 

The  writer  has  not  been  afraid  to  call  a  spade  a 
spade,  and  has  lectured  the  trades  connected  with  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  alcoholic  drink  frequently 
with  candor  and  energy  in  regard  to  such  matters  as 
called  for  correction,  as  the  files  of  the  AMERICAN 
BREWERS'  REVIEW  for  the  past  five  years  will  show. 
He  believes  firmly,  however,  that  in  a  candid  and 
rational  examination  of  the  subject  the  conclusion 
must  be  in  favor  of  the  temperate  use  of  fermented 
beverages. 

The  present  articles  are  intended  to  contribute 
towards  putting  the  public  discussion  of  the  temper- 
ance question  upon  a  basis  of  health,  morality,  hap- 
piness, social  order  and  common  sense. 

CHICAGO,  TIJ..,  March,  1908. 


(March  i,  1908.) 

The   Motive  Which  Leads  to  Alcoholic   Drink  Is 
One  of  the  Best  in  Human  Nature. 

Much  has  of  late  appeared  in  print  concerning  the 
temperate  habits  of  the  Jews.  It  is  related  that  Francis 
Murphy  once  remarked  that  if  all  people  drank  like 
the  Jews  there  would  be  no  temperance  problem. 

One  of  the  very  best  public  deliverances  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink  ever  made  in  Amer- 
ica, comes  in  a  newspaper  account  of  an  address  by 
Rabbi  FINESHRIBER,  of  Davenport,  la,,  given  at 
Temple  Emanuel  in  that  city,  January  10,  1908.  I 
quote  the  following,  which  is  the  greater  part  of  the 
abstract  of  the  address  as  published,  putting  in  italics 
the  words  I  consider  the  most  important : 

Logically  speaking,  prohibition  is  the  most  superficial 
method  of  dealing  with  the  liquor  problem.  The  reason  that 
prohibition  appeals  to  men  is  chiefly  because  it  is  easy  to 
conceive  of  this  plan  of  eradicating  the  evils  existing.  They 
have  in  mind  the  fact,  and  reason  that  if  only  a  law  could 
be  passed  under  which  it  would  be  a  crime  to  consume 
liquors  all  would  be  well.  But  these  easy  solutions  to  great 
evils  are  very  misleading. 

To  those  who  think  they  possess  an  easy  solution  to  a 
problem  that  has  caused  many  to  rack  their  brains  in  vain, 
the  warning  to  beware  is  extended.  How  often  when  an 
easy  plan  to  make  a  large  amount  of  money  is  broached  to 
you  will  you  find  upon  close  and  thorough  investigation  that 
there  is  some  phase  of  the  problem  that  you  have  not  looked 
for  and  which  makes  the  whole  plan  weak  and  elusive? 

5 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

Of  all  those  who  seek  for  the  solution  of  this  matter  there 
are  only  a  few,  very  few  who  find  the  solution.  So  it  is 
with  the  liquor  problem,  which  is  at  once  sociological,  do- 
mestic, and  religious.  There  is  no  easy  way  out  of  it. 

So  far  we  must  be  suspicious  and  not  jump  at  conclusions 
in  regard  to  the  solving  of  this  great  problem.  Let  us  care- 
fully examine  into  the  cause  of  the  desire  for  drink.  When 
a  thing  is  not  right  and  goes  wrong  we  examine  it  to  learn 
the  cause,  and  after  reaching  our  conclusions  we  apply  our 
remedy.  The  best  way  to  solve  the  question  is  not  to  kiss 
and  blow  it  away  as  a  mother  does  an  injury  to  her  child, 
but  let  us  find  out  the  motive  and  the  cure  for  it.  I  be- 
lieve that  the  motive  which  leads  men  to  drink  is  one  of  the 
best  and  not  of  a  lowly  nature  as  is  the  prevailing  opinion. 

This  man  when  he  takes  alcoholic  liquors  does  not  do  so 
from  a  desire  to  satisfy  his  animal  nature,  but  he  wants  an 
enlargement  of  his  conscious  self,  he  desires  to  live  the 
larger  life  and  to  live  a  life  that  is  a  least  bit  better  and  one 
that  is  on  a  higher  plane  and  above  the  ordinary  cares  of  life, 
and  to  reach  this  plane  they  drink.  Now  this  version  of  the 
drink  problem  may  have  a  ludicrous  turn  to  some,  but  why 
is  it  that  some  of  the  finest,  noblest  and  most  learned  of 
men  have  gone  to  the  drunkard's  grave?  They  have  experi- 
enced this  desire  to  rise  above  the  common  planes  of  every- 
day life  and  by  surrendering  to  this  desire  have  sunk  to  a 
drunkard's  end. 

Now  in  order  to  solve  this  great  problem  it  will  not  suffice 
that  we  remove  the  liquor;  this  does  not  answer  the  case. 
We  must  find  a  substitute.  That  is  the  remedy.  Man's  de- 
sires will  not  be  changed;  they  will  always  wish  to  rise 
above  the  ordinary  life  and  to  meet  this  weakness  we  must 
find  a  substitute,  one  that  will  bring  about  this  elevation  to 
the  larger  life.  And  when  this  is  attained  there  may  be  a 
barrel  of  liquor  resting  on  every  corner  and  they  will  remain 
there  until  the  casks  fall  to  pieces  before  being  touched  by 
the  people.  This  would  be  the  case  were  the  minds  of  men 
trained  rightly. 

In  the  education  of  the  children  if  more  emphasis  were 
laid  upon  the  strengthening  of  their  will  power  and  less  time 
spent  in  the  enactment  of  prohibition  laws  we  would  be 
much  nearer  the  solution  of  the  problem  than  we  are  at 
present.  Let  us  see  to  it  that  in  the  homes,  the  mind  and 

6 


Motive  for  Alcoholic  Drink. 

will  power  to  resist  evil,  be  strengthened  and  built  up  and 
then  we  may  feel  that  they  can  go  out  into  the  world  with 
strength  enough  to  resist  temptations,  and  then  the  matter  of 
prohibition  will  be  forever  laid  aside. 

The  learned  rabbi  has  here  put  into  words  the  same 
idea  that  I  have  repeatedly  tried  to  express  in  these 
columns,  except  some  matters  of  detail,  and  especially 
the  last  paragraph,  with  which  I  do  not  quite  agree. 

It  may  be  admitted  that  there  are  people  who  desire 
to  attain  a  condition  of  stupor  or  brutish  mental  indo- 
lence by  alcoholic  drink.  Such  are  the  typical  "alco- 
holics/' the  periodical  or  chronic  drunkards.  They  are 
the  defectives,  bound  by  degeneracy  or  unfortunate 
environment,  usually  both,  to  reach  that  condition  of 
degradation  by  one  path  or  another.  If  they  do  not 
reach  it  by  means  of  alcoholism,  they  will  by  some 
other  means,  and  often  a  worse.  How  many  cases  are 
there  where  a  kindly  physician  or  alienist  has  told  the 
relatives  of  an  unfortunate  who  was  committed  to  an 
asylum  that  it  was  "drink  and  cigarettes,"  because  he 
had  not  the  heart  to  aggravate  their  grief  by  telling 
them  it  was  sexual  perversion  or  other  misfortune, 
commonly  considered  more  infamous  than  alcoholism? 
And  the  records  of  the  asylum  will  tally  one  more  to 
the  debit  account  of  alcoholic  drink  in  creating  in- 
sanity. The  drunkard  is  so  because  he  is  by  nature  an 
abnormal  person.  Just  as  the  criminal  is  so  by 
nature. 

According  to  GAROFALO  and  his  predecessors  in 
the  anthropological  school  of  criminology,  all  crim- 
inals are  abnormal.  There  are  no  normal  persons 
among  them,  and  it  is  impossible  for  them  to  become 
so.  There  is  no  such  individual  as  an  accidental  crim- 
inal, if  we  mean  by  that  term  that  a  person  of  good 
moral  development  can  commit  a  crime.  It  does  not 
follow  that  all  abnormal  persons  necessarily  commit 

7 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much" 

crime.  There  are  so-called  latent  criminals  who  are 
prevented  by  fortunate  environment  from  lapsing  into 
the  category  of  actual  criminals. 

It  is  just  so  with  the  drunkard.  He  is  abnormal, 
and  can  never  be  normal,  although  a  fortunate  environ- 
ment may  prevent  him  from  actually  getting  down 
into  the  gutter.  Still,  as  society  seeks  to  eliminate 
the  criminal  rather  than  put  itself  in  such  a  state  as 
to  prevent  the  criminally  disposed  from  living  up  to 
their  natural  bent,  likewise  society  seeks  to  eliminate 
the  drunkard  rather  than  itself  live  under  the  hospital 
and  prison  regimen  which  is  necessary  in  order  to 
prevent  his  natural  propensity  from  asserting  itself. 

In  other  words,  we  might  as  reasonably  demand  all 
society  to  live  under  a  reform  school  government  de- 
vised to  prevent  the  criminally  disposed  from  actually 
exercising  their  inclinations,  as  demand  that  all  society 
live  under  the  sanitarium  regimen  required  to  keep  the 
drunkard  from  falling  into  the  ways  indicated  by  his 
natural  predisposition.  When  we  are  ready  to  turn 
human  society  into  a  reform  school  or  a  prison,  then 
we  may  rationally  consider  the  adoption  of  prohibi- 
tion. 

But  the  great  mass  of  the  people  drink  to  enjoy,  not 
to  stupefy  themselves  and  kill  the  source  of  both  joy 
and  pain.  And  what  is  joy  but  a  heightened  intensity 
or  enlargement  of  consciousness  ? 

Must  we  be  condemned  forever  to  move  along  in 
the  jog-trot  or  everyday  life?  Is  it  altogether  im- 
proper to  turn  into  a  run  now  and  then?  Is  it  for- 
bidden to  lay  aside  the  merely  material,  if  not  sordid, 
aims  of  business  and  work-a-day  life  and  give  our- 
selves over  to  the  loftier  aspirations  of  the  higher 
life?  Are  we  to  be  bound  down  forever  to  the  low 
ideal  of  business  success  ?  Must  we  forever  keep  our- 

8 


The  Higher  Life. 

selves  at  the  keenest  edge  of  economic  efficiency? 
May  we  not  soar  above  the  commonplace  and  dream 
once  more  the  dreams  of  our  youth,  live  for  the 
nonce  in  the  realm  of  the  imagination  ?  Ah,  the  imag- 
ination !  What  would  the  world  be  without  the  imag- 
ination? "There  are  some  falsehoods  on  which  men 
mount  as  on  bright  wings  to  Heaven.  There  are  some 
truths,  cold,  bitter,  taunting  truths,  wherein  your 
worldly  scholars  are  very  apt  and  punctual,  that  bind 
men  down  to  earth  with  leaden  chains/' 

It  is  the  imagination  to  which  all  the  great  things 
in  the  world  are  due.  Not  the  imagination  of  the 
poet  and  the  artist  alone.  The  philosopher,  the  scien- 
tist, the  statesman,  the  general — they  all  receive  their 
inspiration  from  the  imagination.  What  bolder  flight 
of  imagination  than  that  of  Columbus  to  sail  through 
the  Sea  of  Darkness  to  the  uttermost  coasts  of  the 
Indies?  What  grander  conceit  of  the  imagination 
than  the  celestial  harmonies  that  filled  the  mind  of 
Copernicus  and  Kepler?  What  greater  exaltation 
than  that  imagination  of  Darwin  which  searched  the 
very  plan  of  creation?  What  nobler  ideals  than  the 
imagination  of  Washington  for  the  liberties  of  the 
American  colonists,  of  Lincoln  for  the  liberty  of  the 
human  race? 

Do  such  ideas  rise  in  the  humdrum  of  our  bread- 
and-butter  life  or  in  the  degrading  chase  after  the 
dollar  ?  Nothing  has  ever  proved  such  a  drag  upon  all 
aspirations  after  the  ideal  as  the  pot-boiler  necessities 
and  the  greed  for  pelf.  It  is  true  that  the  improvement 
of  man's  physical  condition  is  an  antecedent  condi- 
tion of  his  spiritual  enlargement.  But  nevertheless 
the  spiritual  life  begins  where  the  grosser  needs  of  the 
body  end,  and  it  is  only  by  getting  away  from  the  dull 
cares  of  mere  existence  that  the  higher  life  can  be 
entered. 

9 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much" 

What  if  alcoholic  drink  does  weaken,  for  the  time 
being,  certain  faculties  of  the  nervous  system?  What 
if  one  can  add  or  multiply  less  rapidly,  or  react  less 
promptly  upon  certain  impressions  while  under  the 
influence  of  a  small  amount  of  alcohol  ?  Is  a  composer 
able  to  do  a  problem  in  calculus  while  engaged  in  cre- 
ative work  on  a  grand  opera?  Or  was  it  a  sign  of 
spiritual  or  mental  dullness  when  Newton  put  his 
watch  into  the  boiling  water  and  gazed  intently  at  the 
egg  in  his  hand?  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  intense  ap- 
plication of  certain  higher  faculties  temporarily  over- 
powers the  lower,  merely  mechanical  psychical  func- 
tions ?  That  is  all  that  Kraepelin  and  the  others  whom 
the  anti-alcoholists  invoke,  proved  when  they  showed 
what  they  called  the  paralyzing  of  certain  nerve  func- 
tions by  certain  doses  of  alcohol.  It  is  characteristic 
of  an  intense  nature  to  concentrate  oneself  on  one 
thing  at  a  time,  and  even  if  such  concentration  reaches 
the  degree  of  complete  so-called  absent-mindedness, 
that  is  no  sign  of  intellectual  or  spiritual  weakness. 
Often  quite  the  contrary,  as  the  stories  about  Newton 
illustrate. 

It  is  the  seeking  after  the  life  on  a  higher  plane  that 
is  one  of  the  impulses  creating  the  desire  for  alcoholic 
stimulation,  the  desire  to  be  lifted  above  the  ordinary 
cares  of  life.  "One  of  the  impulses,"  I  say,  for  there 
are  others,  which  I  have  pointed  out  in  these  columns, 
chiefly  those  of  a  psycho-physiological  character  rest- 
ing in  the  greater  enjoyment  of  physical  things,  which 
is  an  essential  to  health  and  well-being.  And  it  is 
only  this  one  I  am  discussing  now. 

*    *    * 

I  can  propose  an  absolute,  final  solution  of  the  liquor 
problem.  It  is  really  quite  simple. 

Let  us  have  a  perfect  economic  system,  to  begin 
10 


Solution  of  the  Liquor  Problem. 

with,  where  every  person  shall  have  enough,  where 
an  hour  or  two  a  day  spent  in  productive  work  will  be 
ample  to  produce  all  the  necessaries  and  luxuries  of 
life,  where  there  will  be  no  care  for  the  mere  physical 
needs,  where  each  will  render  his  neighbor  his  due, 
where  our  cities  will  all  be  clean  and  beautiful,  our 
streets  well  paved  and  well  lighted,  our  dwellings,  of- 
fices and  factories  large,  airy,  light,  sanitary;  where 
we  shall  all  be  leading  the  temperate  life,  eating  and 
enjoying  as  much  food  as  we  require  and  no  more, 
where  sanitation  will  be  perfect  and  infectious  diseases 
unknown,  where  men  and  women  shall  mate  accord- 
ing to  their  love  and  "affinities"  and  children  be  raised 
in  happiness  and  refinement,  where  all  will  have  abun- 
dant time  for  recreation  and  enjoyment,  for  basking  in 
the  beauties  of  nature,  delighting  in  wholesome  sports 
and  pastimes  free  from  all  wanton  cruelty  to  any 
living  thing,  having  full  and  free  access  to  all  the  ele- 
vating pleasures  of  literature,  art,  music,  where  the 
"higher  life"  will  be  the  rule  instead  of  the  rare  ex- 
ception, as  it  unfortunately  is  now — let  us  have  all 
these  things,  and  then  we  may,  as  Rabbi  Fineshriber 
says,  have  a  barrel  of  liquor  resting  on  every  corner, 
and  we  may  be  sure,  while  we  shall  probably  continue 
to  enjoy  a  glass  of  wine  or  beer,  there  will  be  no 
drunkenness  or  gluttony,  no  crime  or  insanity,  no  pau- 
perism or  vice.  For  by  that  time  all  the  defectives 
will  have  been  eliminated  from  the  race  and  we  shall 
all  know  only  perfect  bliss. 

In  the  meantime,  however,  let  us  work  and  wait.  Let 
us  educate  ourselves  and  our  children,  not  to  become 
mere  drudges  to  the  ambition  for  wealth  or  power,  but 
to  recognize  the  greater  and  better  things  in  life — the 
higher  life.  Let  us  recognize  that  virtue  requires  free- 
dom, that  the  absence  of  crime  in  the  prison  house 

11 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

is  not  the  result  of  virtue,  that  morality  is  the  child 
of  happiness,  that  temperance  is  the  product  of  plenty 
and  of  freedom  to  enjoy,  not  of  scarcity  and  absti- 
nence, that  there  is  not  only  no  harm,  but  great  posi- 
tive good  in  the  temperate  joy  of  living  and  the  mod- 
erate use  of  the  good  things  of  the  world,  that  joy  is 
the  greatest  health  tonic  as  well  as  the  greatest  moral 
uplifter,  and  that  it  is  not  only  folly  but  moral  degra- 
dation to  seek  to  put  us  all  into  a  hospital  because  there 
are  some  among  us  who  are  constitutionally  weak. 

(January  i,  1906.) 
Psychic   Influence  of  Food  and  Drink. 

The  so-called  Committee  of  Fifty*  has  published  a 
volume  summarizing  the  results  of  its  researches  on  the 
liquor  problem  from  the  physiologic,  the  economic  and 
the  legislative  aspects.  In  reading  this  book,  which 
contains  a  great  deal  of  matter  that  is  of  the  highest 
importance  to  the  student  of  the  liquor  problem,  I 
am  struck  with  two  omissions  that  seem  to  be  vital. 

There  is  perhaps  little  cause  for  wonder  that  these 
omissions  occur.  They  occur  everywhere.  They  are 
largely  due  to  the  fact  that  the  outsiders  who  have 
examined  the  problem  are  never  quite  free  from  preju- 
dice, no  matter  how  hard  and  sincerely  they  strive  to 
free  their  minds,  and  to  the  other  fact  that  the  trade 
interests  concerned  have  occupied  themselves  wholly 
with  defenses  against  the  charges  constantly  brought 
against  the  liquor  traffic,  and  have  never  left  their 
breastworks  for  any  aggressive  sallies. 

The  two  points  I  have  in  mind  refer  to  the  psychic 
influence  of  food  and  drink,  for  one,  and  to  a  certain 
aspect  of  the  evil  effects  of  the  intemperate  use  of 


*As  to  the  personnel  and  work  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty 
see  appendix. 

12 


Psychic  Influence  of  Food  and  Drink. 

liquor  in  the  production  of  poverty,  insanity,  crime,  and 
other  misery,  for  the  other. 

Recent  researches  in  the  broad  realm  of  food 
chemistry  and  physiology  have  opened  some  remark- 
able and  interesting  outlooks.  One  of  the  most  in- 
teresting is  that  of  the  psychic  influence  of  food  and 
drink. 

It  is  today  recognized  that  appetite  and  taste,  those 
peculiar  nervous  and  psychic  functions,  the  effects  of 
which  are  observed,  but  the  nature  and  excitation  of 
which  are  so  little  understood,  are  of  extreme  im- 
portance in  all  matters  concerning  food  and  drink. 
Food  introduced  into  the  mouth  not  only  excites  the 
flow  of  saliva,  but  also,  by  nervous  action,  starts  the 
secretion  of  gastric,  juice,  preparatory  to  its  reception 
and  digestion  in  the  stomach.  Even  though  the  food 
never  reaches  the  stomach,  this  excitation  of  stomachic 
action  takes  place,  as  Pavlov  showed  by  his  experi- 
ments with  dogs  in  whose  esophagus  he  developed  a 
fistula,  i.  e.j  a  permanent  opening,  so  that  the  food 
dropped  out  instead  of  reaching  the  stomach.  The 
more  savory  the  food,  the  greater  the  secretion  of 
digestive  fluids.  It  is  not  intended  here  to  advocate 
high  seasoning  of  food.  But  the  general  psychic  ef- 
fect, the  appetizing  preparation  of  the  table,  the  clean, 
pleasing  serving  of  the  food,  the  delicious  odor,  and 
last  and  most  important,  the  enjoyable  sensation  of  the 
food  itself  on  the  palate  and  tongue  are  most  power- 
ful aids  of  digestion.  If,  then,  a  glass  of  beer  or  wine 
serves  to  heighten  the  pleasure  of  eating,  it  thereby 
performs  a  highly  important  function  in  aid  of  diges- 
tion. 

This  is  quite  aside  from  the  nutriment  supplied  by 
the  beer,  and  the  direct  stimulating  effect  of  the  alcohol 
on  the  digestive  apparatus. 

The  anti-alcoholists  will  now  charge  me  with  en- 
13 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

couraging  gluttony.  That  is  their  way.  They  can- 
not take  up  anything  in  moderation.  Temperance  is 
the  virtue  farthest  removed  from  them. 

I  am  not  advocating  gluttony.  Quite  the  contrary. 
Savory  food,  not  seasoned  so  as  to  exert  an  abnorm- 
ally stimulating  influence,  if  thoroughly  chewed  and 
mixed  with  saliva — which  is  an  essential  condition  in 
all  food  and  without  which  it  should  never  be  swal- 
lowed— will  so  satisfy  both  appetite  and  hunger  as 
to  induce  moderate  eating.  But  such  food  as  is  taken 
should  appeal  to  the  eye,  the  touch,  the  smell,  and 
the  taste,  in  order  to  produce  the  most  beneficial  re- 
sults upon  the  system.  All  the  ordinary  foods,  proper- 
ly prepared,  masticated  and  insalivated,  are  practically 
of  equal  digestibility.  Their  chemical  composition  and 
their  physical  condition,  under  these  premises,  are 
alike  of  secondary  importance.  The  main  question  is 
not  what  we  eat,  but  how  we  eat.  And  if  we  eat  in 
the  right  manner,  we  shall  not  overeat,  but  can  correct 
even  that  abnormal  appetite  which  most  of  us  possess 
in  the  matter  of  eating  as  a  result  of  false  bringing-up 
and  indulging  so-called  instinct.  Instinct  is  a  will-o'- 
the-wisp.  The  savage,  who  is  supposed  to  have  in- 
stinct, overeats — if  he  has  anything  to  eat.  Civilized 
man  learns  to  train  the  mis-called  "natural"  instinct, 
and  to  develop  a  wholesome  appetite.  At  least,  he  has 
the  means  to  do  so. 

The  psychic  influence  of  a  glass  of  beer  with  a  meal 
is  thus  of  direct,  positive  value  in  promoting  digestion. 
But  there  are  also  indirect  effects  to  the  same  end. 
The  quickened  spirits  of  the  man,  the  stimulated  flow 
of  conversation,  the  sallies  of  wit,  the  good  fellow- 
ship— all  these  things  exert  similar  influences  in  pro- 
moting the  beneficial  effects  of  eating.  I  have  heard 
of  physicians  prescribing  the  theatre,  a  good  comedy, 
as  a  cure  for  indigestion.  If  a  good  laugh,  the  en- 

14 


Misery  from  Intemperate  Eating. 

livening  of  the  spirits,  in  a  word,  pleasure,  joy,  in  the 
proper  sense  of  the  term,  can  aid  digestion  after  food 
has  been  improperly  taken,  how  much  greater  must 
be  the  tonic  effect  if  they  accompany  the  taking  of  the 
food  and  can  act  upon  it  in  the  early  and  important 
preparatory  stages  of  digestion  and  absorption? 

In  other  words,  we  should  eat,  not  feed.  And  this 
is  not  in  conflict  with  "the  simple  life."  Simple  food 
can  be  enjoyed  just  as  well  as  ,the  most  complicated  pro- 
ductions of  the  French  chef.  As  by  adding  the  psychic 
element  to  the  procreative  instinct  man  elevates  it  into 
the  sublime  passion  of  love,  so  by  adding  the  psychic 
element  to  the  simple  act  of  feeding,  man  can  make 
of  it  the  kernel  of  the  noblest  associations,  the  start- 
ing point  of  high  friendships,  the  source  of  close  soul 
communion,  the  center  of  fellowship,  the  birth  of  high 
thought  and  unselfish  action,  the  spring  of  wit  and 
eloquence.  And  all  these  psychic  ornaments  whereby 
a  mere  physiological  function  is  elevated,  act  as  most 
powerful  digestors — thus  bringing  this  talk  back  to 
earth  again. 

Intemperance  in  Food  Causes  more  Distress  than 
Intemperance  in  Drink. 

The  fact  that  a  glass  of  beer  heightens  the  pleasure 
of  eating  constitutes,  then,  a  most  important  point  in 
its  favor. 

The  second  point  to  which  I  want  to  refer  is  a 
certain  aspect  of  the  evil  effects  of  the  intemperate  use 
of  liquor  in  producing  poverty,  crime,  insanity,  and 
other  misery. 

The  advocates  of  temperance,  *.  e.}  of  the  temperate 
use  of  all  things,  including  fermented  beverages,  have 
devoted  much  time  to  efforts  to  controvert  or  mini- 
mize the  charge  that  intoxicating  drink  not  only  con- 
tributes to  those  evils,  but  is  the  chief  cause  of  them. 

15 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 


~A    ;« 


Estimates  of  the  share  of  crime,  pauperism  and  in- 
sanity caused  by  liquor  run  as  high  as  seventy-five 
per  cent.  The  Committee  of  Fifty  seems  to  gravitate 
toward  a  percentage  of  twenty-five  for  poverty,  about 
thirty  for  crime. 

The  question  is  a  broad  one  as  well  as  deep.  For 
my  own  part,  I  do  not  believe  that  twenty-five  per 
cent  is  even  approximately  a  true  figure.  Certain  in- 
vestigations abroad  go  as  low  as  two  per  cent  for 
poverty.  The  wide  divergence  of  results  shows  to  my 
mind  that  the  results  are  of  very  little  value  as  show- 
ing the  actual  facts,  whereas  they  do  seem  to  show  the 
natural  tendency  of  social  reformers,  as  well  as  of 
the  paupers  and  criminal  themselves,  to  lay  the  blame 
on  liquor.  It  is  the  scapegoat.  In  most  cases  a  drunk- 
ard is  pre-disposed,  as  the  anti-alcoholist  is,  to  intem- 
perance. The  one  lets  himself  go,  and  becomes  a 
drunkard.  The  other  keeps  himself  in  check  in  that 
respect,  and  goes  to  extremes  in  other  things.  Both 
are  abnormal.  It  is  not  liquor  that  makes  the  drunk- 
ard, it  is  the  man.  It  is  not  the  fine  cooking  that  makes 
the  glutton,  it  is  the  man,  and,.of  course,  his  environ- 
ment, consisting  of  a  thousand  influences. 

But,  be  the  percentage  large  or  small,  let  us  admit, 
for  the  sake  of  the  present  argument,  that  an  ap- 
preciable amount  of  poverty  and  crime  is  due  to  the 
intemperate  use  of  liquor.  What  does  it  prove  ?  What 
conclusions  as  to  the  use  of  fermented  beverages  does 
it  justify? 

I  should  like  to  see  a  Committee  of  Fifty  send  out 
a  few  hundred  skillful  observers  to  gather  statistics 
showing  the  percentage  of  crime,  poverty,  insanity, 
etc.,  that  ought  to  be  charged  up  to  dyspepsia,  indiges- 
tion, overeating,  gluttony,  or  whatever  they  might  wish 
to  call  the  protean  forms  of  that  constant  abuse  of 
the  alimentary  canal  to  which  nearly  all  people  are 

16 


Irrational  Betting. 

subjecting  themselves.  I  do  not  mean  only  the  con- 
firmed dyspeptic  or  hypochondriac,  as  they  used  to 
call  this  wretched  being,  I  mean  the  chronic  "grouch" 
of  the  man  who  does  not  feel  right  and  doesn't  know 
why — after  eating  half  a  pound  of  meat  and  eight 
ounces  of  potatoes  and  a  few  ounces  of  vegetables,  and 
bread  and  butter  galore,  and  some  pickles,  and  sweet- 
meats, and  cheese,  altogether  enough  to  sustain  a  man 
for  two  days — the  ill  temper  vented  on  office  help  or 
factory  hands,  the  whimsical  discharging  of  faithful 
employes,  the  spiteful  "knocking"  of  a  com- 
petitor, the  quarrel  with  the  wife,  the  scolding  of 
children.  Or  the  woman  whose  nerves  are  "on  edge" 
and  she  doesn't  know  why,  who  is  ready  to  "fly  to 
pieces"  at  a  cross  word,  venting  her  ill-humor  on  serv- 
ants, herself  inaccessible  to  her  children,  if  she  has 
any, — they  are  so  noisy  and  pester  one  so,  the  little 
brats — the  woman  who  could  not  bear  the  nauseating 
smell  of  the  kitchen  and  savory  cooking, — it's  beneath 
her,  you  know,  woman  was  born  for  better  things — 
the  woman  who  complains  of  aches  in  all  parts  and 
resents  your  imputation  that  it  comes  from  the 
stomach,  insisting  her  stomach  is  all  right,  and  at 
the  same  time  exhaling  a  breath  that  she  has 
been  obliged  to  perfume  in  order  to  conceal  its  of- 
fensiveness — when  that  man  and  that  woman  meet  in 
the  evening,  what  sort  of  a  home  circle  is  it  going  to  be  ? 
Or,  take  the  poor  man  who  has  to  bolt  his  food  in 
a  hurry,  some  soggy  baker's  bread  only  half  done, 
with  raw  beef  fat  flavored  to  resemble  butter,  some 
cheap  tough  meat,  often  cooked  stringy  and  with  the 
savory  juice  boiled  out  and  thrown  away,  a 
piece  of  factory  pie  of  doughy  consistency  and 
unknown  composition,  made  more  indigestible  by 
copious  drinks  of  coflfee  thoroughly  boiled  so  as 
to  extract  all  the  injurious  matters  from  the  bean 

17 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 


and  drive  off  the  aroma — perhaps,  in  some  cases, 
the  only  redeeming  feature  of  the  meal  a  can 
or  bottle  of  beer ;  or  the  wife  at  home  struggling  with 
her  work  and  her  children — she  is  sure  to  have  them 
and  will  do  what  she  can  for  them  according  to  her 
light — snatching  a  bite  of  food  now  and  then  and 
swallowing  it  almost  whole,  then  sweating  in  a  stuffy 
kitchen  to  prepare  the  husband's  and  children's  supper 
made  up  in  large  part  of  food  on  which  the  highest 
art  of  the  adulterator  has  been  expended — what  sort 
of  a  home  circle  is  that  going  to  be? 

Let  us  grant,  for  the  sake  of  this  argument  only, 
that  liquor  causes  some  crime,  poverty,  etc.  But  I 
must  insist  that  food  causes  many  times  as  much.  The 
misery  we  see  about  us,  poverty,  crime,  vice,  insanity, 
divorces,  orphans  by  action  of  court,  married  men 
without  wife  or  home,  married  women  without  a  hus- 
band— in  his  place  only  a  man  who  pays  the  bills — 
children  to  whom  father  and  mother  are  little  more 
than  a  legend,  members  of  a  family  seeking  pleasure 
and  consolation  away  from  home,  coming  together  at 
meal  time  to  take  up  a  fresh  charge  of  centrifugal 
force,  driving  them  apart  to  seek  gratification  and 
pleasure  in  spots  unhallowed  by  the  name  of  "home," 
ending,  perhaps,  in  crime  and  self-destruction — this 
is  due  to  food,  perhaps  more  directly  than  the  other, 
smaller  percentage,  is  due  to  drink.  And  this  icy 
atmosphere  is  more  congenial  to  the  growth  of  vice  and 
crime  than  the  generous  warmth  of  feeling  engendered 
by  a  glass  of  beer  or  wine.  And  the  physical  condi- 
tions fostered  by  this  life  are  the  pre-disposing  causes 
for  disease  far  more  immediately  than  in  most  cases 
drink  is  the  cause  of  poverty  or  crime.  And  with 
disease,  vice  and  crime  comes  the  untold  misery,  silent- 
ly borne,  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  homes,  filling 
the  private  retreats  and  sanitariums,  where  the  charity 

18 


Temperance  is  the  Key. 

worker  who  gathers  the  statistics  as  to  the  amount  of 
insanity  caused  by  drink,  never  sets  foot,  for  he  goes 
to  the  public  asylums  which  are  not  shielded  by  the 
euphemism  of  "sanitariums." 

Then,  according  to  the  reasoning  of  the  anti-alcohol- 
ists,  you  should  stop  eating!  Prohibit  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  food ! 

Where's  the  sense?  It  is  not  to  stop  eating.  It  is 
to  learn  to  eat  right.  It  is  for  the  adult  to  study 
the  question,  or  take  sound  medical  advice,  and  observe 
and  govern  himself.  It  is  for  the  parents  and  the 
teacher  to  raise  children  so  that  their  appetites  shall 
be  normal,  that  they  shall  not  desire  excess,  but  shun 
it  "instinctively" — if  you  like  that  word — without  the 
need  of  conscious  self-restraint.  It  is  for  the  legislator 
to  secure  purity  of  food  articles,  for  the  physician  to 
give  advice  to  keep  the  people  in  health  rather  than 
pull  them  out  of  disease,  it  is  for  the  housekeepers  and 
public-house  keepers  to  learn  to  cook  rationally  and 
with  a  view  to  satisfy  normal  hunger  and  appetite,  not 
to  stimulate  jaded  palates  or  gorge  extended  stomachs. 

Was  there  ever  anything  good  that  was  unaccom- 
panied by  evil?  Was  there  ever  a  virtue  that,  sought 
or  practised  to  excess,  did  not  turn  to  vice  or  crime? 
Quotations  from  poets  and  philosophers  of  all  ages 
might  be  multiplied  on  this  subject,  to  prove  the  un- 
animity of  the  mountain  peaks  of  human  intellect  on 
this  point. 

Temperance!  That  is  the  key  to  the  whole  ques- 
tion as  to  both  food  and  drink.  Eat  temperately  and 
drink  temperately,  and  you  will  be  healthy  and  strong, 
virtuous  and  wise,  generous  and  affectionate,  accord- 
ing to  your  gifts  and  your  light. 

What  we  ought  to  repel  is  the  attempt  to  throw  the 
burden  of  poverty,  crime,  and  insanity  upon  alcoholic 
drink,  whose  share  in  causing  such  misery  is  not  the 

19 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

greatest,  although  unfortunately  it  is  not  so  insidious 
a  cause  or  one  so  difficult  to  trace  as  is  intemperance  in 
food.  It  is,  in  fact,  far  less  dangerous.  For  while 
the  effects  of  irrational  eating  do  not  appear  in  plain, 
unmistakable  symptoms  at  once,  the  results  of  exces- 
sive drinking  advertise  themselves  instantly  and  invite 
reform. 

(February   i,   1906.) 
Responses  of  Members  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty. 

The  articles  in  the  January  issue  of  the  American 
Brewers'  Review,  specifically  referring  to  the  "Psychic 
Influence  of  Food  and  Drink"  and  to  the  proposi- 
tion that  "Intemperance  in  Food  Causes  More  Dis- 
tress than  Intemperance  in  Drink,"  were  sent  to  the 
members  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty,  whose  latest  book 
suggested  them.  A  number  of  answers  have  been  re- 
ceived from  members  of  that  committee,  some  of  which 
I  am  at  liberty  to  publish. 

I  consider  it  highly  important  to  interest  men  of  the 
class  that  make  up  this  committee  in  the  cause  we  are 
advocating.  Public  opinion  in  this  country  is  made 
by  a  small  minority  of  people,  for  the  most  part  those 
of  Anglo-American  stock,  as  far  as  blood  goes,  and 
professional  men,  scholars,  clergymen  and  leading  busi- 
ness men,  as  far  as  vocation  is  concerned.  If  men  of 
this  class  can  be  roused  to  take  an  active  part  or  even 
to  give  an  occasional  expression  of  their  views,  there 
is  hope  that  the  efforts  of  the  anti-alcoholists  to  mis- 
direct public  opinion  in  the  line  of  intemperance  in 
thought,  speech  and  action  may  be  thwarted  in  time 
to  avert  serious  injury  to  the  people,  to  say  nothing 
of  the  crippling  of  the  great  brewing  industry. 

The  letters  referred  to  are  as  follows : 
20 


Responses  of  Committee  of  Fifty. 

From  the  president  of  Harvard  University. 

HARVARD  UNIVERSITY,  CAMBRIDGE,  Jan,  8,  1906. 

I  can  agree  with  some  of  your  doctrine  in  the  "Talks  on 
Beer  and  Temperance"  which  you  send  me.  Thus,  I  agree 
that  "The  main  question  is  not  what  we  eat,  but  how  we 
eat,"  and  also  that  over-eating  causes  quite  as  many  bodily 
evils  as  over-drinking.  It  does  not,  however,  cause  as  much 
crime.  Further,  I  agree  with  you  that  it  is  better  to  drink 
beer  than  drink  whiskey;  but  then  it  is  easy  to  drink  too 
much  beer,  as  the  experience  of  the  German  nation  abund- 
antly proves.  A  cheap  and  good  provision  of  beer  and  light 
wine  will  not  prevent  Teutonic  peoples  from  drinking  distilled 
liquor  to  excess.  On  this  point  see  the  experience  of  Cali- 
fornia. Drunkenness  is  a  vice  that  goes  by  race.  The 
Latin  races  are  not  addicted  to  it;  the  Russian  and  Teutonic 
races  are.  Very  truly  yours, 

CHARLES   W.   ELIOT. 

From  Prof.  Henry  W.  Farnam  (Yale). 

NEW  HAVEN,  CONN.,  January  8,  1906. 

Please  accept  my  thanks  for  the  copy  of  your  article  on 
Beer  and  Temperance  which  I  received  this  morning.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  some  of  the  pauperism  and  crime  may  be  at- 
tributed, as  you  suggest,  to  bad  food,  but  inasmuch  as  the 
effects  of  this  are  much  more  difficult  to  trace  than  those 
of  alcohol,  I  hardly  think  it  possible  to  secure  any  statistics 
on  the  subject,  and  I  should  think  it  very  unsafe  to  make 
any  numerical  comparison. 

The  subject  has,  however,  not  been  neglected  by  scientists. 
A  member  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty,  my  colleague,  Pro- 
fessor R.  H.  Chittenden,  has  published  a  very  valuable  book 
entitled  "The  Physiological  Economy  of  Nutrition,"  the  prac- 
tical effects  of  which  will,  I  believe,  be  to  induce  greater 
moderation  in  food,  thus  attaining  both  ends  for  which 
your  article  pleads,  namely,  greater  enjoyment  of  what  is 
eaten  and  less  dyspepsia.  If  you  have  not  seen  this  work, 
I  believe  that  you  will  be  glad  to  have  it  called  to  your  at- 
tention. Believe  me,  Yours  very  truly, 

HENRY  W.  FARNAM. 

From  Jacob  H.   Schiff,  banker. 

KUHN,  LOEB  &  Co.,  NEW  YORK,  Jan.  8th,  1906. 

I  have  your  communication  of  the  6th  instant,  and  thank 
you  for  your  courtesy  in  sending  me  a  copy  of  the  AMER- 

21 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

ICAN    BREWERS'    REVIEW,    which   I    shall    read    with   interest, 
and,   no   doubt,    with   advantage.    Truly   yours, 

JACOB  H.  SCHIFF. 
From  the  Bishop  of  Tennessee. 
DIOCESE  OF  TENNESSEE,  OFFICE  OF  THE  BISHOP. 

MEMPHIS,  TENN.,  Jan.  n,  1906. 

I  thank  you  for  your  letter  of  January  5th,  with  the 
copy  of  your  REVIEW  enclosed. 

The  question  you  discuss  is  of  great  importance  and  as 
you  say  naturally  divides  itself  in  the  problem  of  develop- 
ment of  individual  character  and  of  creating  the  legislation 
of  environment  calculated  to  encourage  such  development. 

What  you  have  written  about  the  subject  of  poverty  and 
crime,  etc.,  strikes  me  as  reasonable,  and  I  have  no  doubt 
we  might  take  lessons  from  conditions  which  prevail  in 
Europe. 

Thanking  you  again  for  your  letter,   I  am, 
Most  sincerely  yours, 

THOS.  F.  GAILOR, 
Bishop  of  Tennessee. 

Intemperance  in  Eating  as  a  Source  of  Poverty  and 
Crime. 

I  want  to  take  up  some  of  the  points  in  regard  to 
which  the  eminent  gentlemen  differ  with  me. 

President  Eliot's  statement  that  "over-eating  does 
not  cause  as  much  crime  as  over-drinking"  seems  to 
me  somewhat  too  categorical.  I  would  rather  take 
Professor  Farnam's  version,  who  says  that  "inasmuch 
as  the  effects  of  this  (bad  food)  are  much  more  difficult 
to  trace  than  those  of  alcohol,  I  hardly  think  it  pos- 
sible to  secure  any  statistics  on  the  subject,  and  I 
should  think  it  very  unsafe  to  make  numerical  com- 
parisons." That  is  practically  what  I  said  in  the  Jan- 
uary issue,  except  that  Prof.  Farnam  puts  it  in  more 
refined  language. 

It  seems  exceedingly  probable  to  me — and  I  believe 
some  time  we  shall  know  enough  about  the  subject 
to  be  able  to  verify  this  idea  by  observation  of  the 

22 


Poverty  and  Crime  from  Intemperance. 

facts — that  irrational  and  excessive  eating  causes  vastly 
more  crime  than  over-drinking.  For  one  thing,  it 
is  responsible  for  a  large  share  of  that  very  over- 
drinking which  is  charged  with  producing  so  much 
crime.  Highly  seasoned  food,  an  overloaded  stomach, 
distress  or  uncomfortable  feelings  caused  by  abuse  of 
the  stomach  and  alimentary  canal  are  very  prolific 
sources  of  over-stimulation.  It  may  take  the  form  of 
several  cordials  after  a  meal,  or  of  an  unquenchable 
thirst  an  hour  or  two  after,  or  restlessness  at  night 
calling  for  sedatives  or  stimulants,  etc.  It  may  cause 
a  chronic  false  thirst  or  appetite  and  lead  from  bad 
to  worse.  For  another  thing,  if  irrational  and  ex- 
cessive eating— I  do  not  speak  only  of  over-eating — 
causes  many  bodily  evils,  it  is  by  that  fact  alone  a 
fertile  source  of  crime,  for  it  is  bodily  evils  that  largely 
generate  the  mental  and  moral  conditions  in  which 
crime  is  hatched.  It  is  the  general  state  of  mental 
unrest,  of  moral  depression,  the  pessimistic  or  nar- 
rowly brutal  view  of  life,  the  abnormal  stimulation  of 
sexual  passion — the  latter  being  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant of  all  sources  of  crime — that  bring  in  their 
train  that  revival  of  primitive  humanity,  the  expres- 
sions of  which  a  civilized  society  stigmatizes  as  crime. 

Effects  of  Beer  Drinking  on  the  Germans. 

It  may  be  true — it  undoubtedly  is  true — that  the 
German  nation  drinks  too  much  beer.  But  it  is  also 
true  that  Germany  has  abundantly  deserved  the  title 
conferred  upon  her  by  a  Latin  writer,  of  officina 
gentium,  that  she  has  for  the  last  1,500  years  furnished 
the  population  for  the  civilized  world  which  she  has 
conquered  and  to  the  culture  of  which  she  has  added 
the  most  valuable  elements.  Surely,  beer  has  not  ex- 
hausted or  even  impaired  her  vitality.  It  is  also  true 
that  Germans,  in  common  with  other  people,  drink 

23 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

much  less  today  than  formerly.  As  in  England,  so  in 
Germany  and  in  America,  it  is  no  longer  considered 
proper  at  a  dinner  to  become  "drunk  as  a  lord."  This 
is  simply  in  the  natural  course  of  advancing  culture. 
Anti-alcoholist  movements  have  had  little  to  do  with 
it.  In  former  times  people  also  used  to  eat  more,  and 
altogether  indulge  the  flesh  a  great  deal  more  than 
is  considered  right  at  present,  excepting  some  ascetics 
who  only  served  to  emphasize  the  general  condition 
of  animalism.  We  know  very  well  that  civilization  is 
but  the  getting  away  from  more  primitive  conditions. 

Progress  of  Temperance  in  Eating  and  Drinking. 

The  very  fact  that  we  have  anti-alcoholists  today 
proves  that  conditions  have  greatly  improved.  As 
long  as  everybody  ate  and  drank  to  excess,  there  was 
nothing  improper  seen  in  it.  Now  that  higher  ideas 
are  gaining,  these  practices  are  recognized  as  evil,  and 
ill-balanced  minds  want  to  do  away,  not  with  the  abuse, 
but  with  the  use  of  the  good  things  of  the  world.  I 
cannot  help  thinking  of  what  Herbert  Spencer  said  in 
this  connection : 

Elsewhere  I  have  illustrated  the  curious  truth  that  while 
an  evil  is  very  great  it  attracts  little  or  no  attention;  that 
when,  from  one  or  other  cause,  it  is  mitigated,  recognition 
of  it  brings  efforts  to  decrease  it;  and  when  it  has  much 
diminished,  there  comes  a  strong  demand  that  strong  meas- 
ures shall  be  taken  for  its  extinction;  natural  means  hav- 
ing done  so  much,  a  peremptory  call  for  artificial  means 
arises.  One  of  the  instances  T  named  was  the  immense 
decline  in  drunkenness  which  has  taken  place  since  the 
.  eighteenth  century,  followed  during  recent  times  by  a  loud 
advocacy  of  legislation  for  suppressing  it.  The  occasion 
for  recalling  this  instance  has  been  the  discovery  of  evid- 
ence showing  how  extreme  were  the  excesses  6f  our  great- 
grandfathers. 

What  has  produced  the  transformation  that  has  since  taken 
place?  Not  legislation,  not  stern  repression,  not  coercion. 
The  improvement  has  slowly  arisen,  along  with  other  so- 

24 


Progress  of  Temperance. 

cial  improvements,  from  natural  causes.  Nature's  power 
of  curing  has  been  in  operation.  But  this  large  fact  and 
other  large  facts  having  like  implications  are  ignored  by 
our  agitators.  They  cannot  be  made  to  recognize  the  pro- 
!  cess  of  evolution  resulting  from  men's  daily  activities,  though 
facts  forced  on  them  from  morning  till  night  show  this  in 
myriadfold  ways.  Undeveloped  brains  cannot  recognize 
the  results  of  slow,  silent,  invisible  causes. 

Small  changes  wrought  by  officials  are  clearly  conceived, 
but  there  is  no  conception  of  those  vast  changes  which 
have  been  wrought  through  the  daily  process  of  things  un- 
directed by  authority.  And  thus  the  notion  that  a  society 
is  a  manufacture  and  not  an  evolution  vitiates  political 
thinking  at  large,  leading  to  the  belief  that  only  by  coercion 
can  benefits  be  achieved.  Is  an  evil  shown?  Then  it  must 
be  suppressed  by  law.  Is  a  good  thing  suggested?  Then 
let  it  be  compassed  by  law. 

The  Committee  of  Fifty  through  its  Sub-Committee 
on  the  Physiological  Aspects  of  the  Liquor  Problem 
has  shown  a  marked  decrease  in  drinking  in  the  United 
States,  even  within  a  few  generations.    It  is,  as  I  say, 
the  general  drift  of  things  towards  better  and  higher 
conditions.    The  heroes  of  ancient  Greece  were  repre- 
sented as  tremendous  eaters,  it  was   one  of  the  at- 
tributes of  the  heroic  character.     The  darling  of  Teu- 
tonic mythology,  Thor,  ate  two  whole  oxen  at  one 
sitting  on  the  occasion  of  his  visit  to  the  giant  Hymir. 
Those  ideals  have  passed  away.     They  represent  the 
aspirations  of  more  primitive  men,  as  do  the  Houris 
of  the  Moslem  heavens  in  another  direction.    A  similar 
drift  from  primitive  indulgence  towards  the  greater 
temperance  of  civilized  man  can  with  greater  accuracy 
perhaps  be  traced  in  the  gradual  contraction  of  the 
limits  governing  the  relations  of  the  sexes,  from  primi- 
tive clan  and  group  association  to  the  modern  pairing 
marriage.     These  are  analogues  of  the  gradual  ad- 
vance in  the  drinking  habits  of  our  race.    It  is  progress 
owing  to  general  causes. 

25 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

Drunkenness  as  Affected  by  Race. 

That  drunkenness  goes  by  race  is  largely  true.  'The 
Latin  races,"  says  President  Eliot,  "are  not  addicted 
to  it;  the  Russian  and  Teutonic  races  are."  The  facts 
on  this  subject  compiled  and  ably  discussed  by  Dr. 
Bowditch  form  highly  interesting  reading.  There 
seem  also  to  be  climatic  influences  that  make  smaller 
quantities  of  alcoholic  drink  advisable  in  America  than 
in  Europe. 

On  a  subject  so  little  understood  it  may  be  hazardous 
to  venture  a  conjecture.  Yet  it  seems  to  me  there  may 
be  some  causal  connection  between  the  less  degree  of 
drunkenness  among  the  Latins  of  Southern  Europe  as 
compared  to  the  Teutons  of  the  Northern  countries, 
and  the  natural  presence  in  the  Latin  countries  of  the 
heavier  wines  of  Italy  and  Spain.  The  fact  that  the 
Latin  could  always  quench  his  thirst  and  derive  both 
nourishment  and  moderate  stimulation  without  great 
effort  or  cost  from  the  grapes  indigenous  to  his  coun- 
try may  fairly  be  assumed  to  have  a  great  deal  to  do 
with  making  him  temperate.  Having  this  wholesome 
beverage  naturally  at  hand  he  did  not  take  so  readily 
to  distillation  when  it  was  later  introduced  in  Europe 
by  the  Moors. 

Poverty  or  Crime?  Which  is  Due  most  to  Drinking? 

President  Eliot  inclines  to  charge  more  crime  than 
poverty  to  drink.  A  writer  on  the  subject  says: 
"The  drunkard  may  never  kill  anybody,  and  yet  beat 
his  wife,  abuse  his  children,  waste  all  his  earnings  in 
a  rum-shop,  and  reduce  his  family  to  want  That 
drunkenness  is  a  most  fruitful  cause  of  poverty  and 
domestic  unhappiness,  if  not  the  most  fruitful,  no  can- 
did person  can  doubt;  that  the  saloon  is  the  root  of 
many  of  the  worst  evils  which  now  afflict  us  is  equally 
certain.  The  temperance  people  have  plenty  of  argu- 

26 


Conditions  are  Improving. 

ments  on  their  side,  even  if  it  is  shown  that  rum  is 
not  the  cause  of  all  the  crime  in  the  world." 

Here  the  balance  is  struck  in  favor  of  poverty  as 
caused  by  drink  rather  than  of  crime.  Which  is 
right? 

However,  I  am  not  so  much  interested  in  drunken- 
ness or  gluttony.  I  am  speaking  of  the  temperate  use 
of  alcoholic  drink  as  well  as  of  food.  And  I  repeat, 
the  temperate  use  of  food  and  drink,  including  light 
fermented  beverages,  is  not  harmful  to  persons  of 
normal  constitution.  That  there  are  abnormal  people 
who  cannot  use  alcohol,  is  not  denied  any  more  than 
that  there  are  people  with  peculiar  idiosyncrasies  in 
regard  to  eating.  I  know  a  man,  a  fine  specimen  phys- 
ically as  well  as  mentally,  who  cannot  eat  egg  without 
going  into  convulsions.  That  is  no  reason  why  I  should 
not  eat  eggs.  There  are  also  unfortunates  burdened 
with  some  physical  unsoundness  who  cannot  take 
alcohol  in  moderate  quantities  without  evil  effects.  But 
that  is  no  reason  why  everybody  else  should  abstain 
from  it. 

No    Cause   for   Alarm.    Conditions   are   Improving 
Continually. 

In  the  introduction  to  the  summary  of  the  investiga- 
tions of  the  Committee  of  Fifty;  recently  published, 
Prof.  Francis  G.  Peabody,  of  Cambridge,  Mass. 
(Harvard),  says: 

If,  in  the  confusion  of  opinion,  which  prevails  concern- 
ing the  drink-problem,  a  body  of  facts  can  be  collected 
which  in  any  degree  represents  the  truth  as  it  is  now 
understood  by  students  of  physical  and  social  life,  then 
— while  such  facts  are  not  likely  to  satisfy  all  who  are 
already  committed  to  special  methods  of  reform! — they  may 
provide  a  foundation  for  more  rational  and  comprehensive 
measures.  The  cause  of  temperance  has  been  much  ob- 
structed by  intemperate  speech  and  exaggerated  statement,  and 
has  suffered  much  through  dissensions  among  those  who 

27 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

should  have  been  allies.  There  is  much  to  fear  from  ex- 
cess of  drink,  but  there  is  also  much  to  fear  from  ex- 
cessive statements  which  experience  soon  discovers  to  be 
unsupported  by  facts.  An  investigation,  therefore,  which 
disclaims  didactic  intention,  may  not  be  without  didactic 
results.  To  affirm,  for  instance,  as  is  done  by  the  report 
of  the  Physiological  Sub-committee,  that  the  limit  of  ju- 
dicious use  of  alcohol  as  a  beverage  is :  (a)  A  single  glass 
of  wine  per  day;  (b)  For  persons  of  middle  age  or  over; 
(c)  As  a  sedative,  at  the  end  of  the  day;  may  appear  to 
those  accustomed  to  inflammatory  appeals  a  diluted  form 
of  temperance  argument,  but  to  other  minds  it  may  appear 
a  more  convincing  and  commanding  statement  than  to  teach 
that  a  single  glass  of  beer  is  a  step  to  a  drunkard's  grave. 
To  point  out,  as  is  done  by  the  Legislative  Sub-committee, 
that  "it  cannot  be  positively  affirmed  that  any  kind  of  liquor 
legislation  has  been  more  successful  than  another  in  pro- 
moting real  temperance,"  may  be  to  minds  trained  to  regard 
a  single  form  of  legislation  as  redemptive  a  somewhat  im- 
potent conclusion ;  but  this  apparently  negative  conclusion 
will  to  ether  minds  open  the  way  to  a  more  tolerant  and 
judicious  application  of  law  as  a  means  rather  than  an  end, 
and  will  suggest  a  cautious  opportunism  which  adapts  meth- 
ods of  law  to  variations  in  local  condition,  racial  tendency, 
and  density  of  population. 

Indeed,  it  is  not  impossible  that  a  mere  statement  of  the 
facts  concerning  the  drink-habit,  as  that  social  peril  presents 
itself  to  a  considerable  number  of  reasonably  impartial  ob- 
servers, may  of  itself  carry  to  some  minds  the  force  of  a 
new  argument  for  temperance.  Differences  of  opinion  con- 
cerning methods  of  reform  should  not  obscure  the  prac- 
tical agreement  of  all  thoughtful  students  of  society  con- 
cerning the  menace  to  modern  civilization  through  the  abuse 
of  alcoholic  drinks.  The  truth  on  the  subject  is  so  grave 
and  portentous  that  it  needs  no  exhortation  to  carry  an  ap- 
peal to  the  conscience  and  the  will  According  to  the 
Economic  Sub- Committee,  25  per  cent,  of  the  poverty  of  the 
United  States  may  be  traced  directly  or  indirectly  to  liquor; 
nearly  50  per  cent,  of  crime  is  referred  to  intemperance  as 
one  cause,  and  in  31  per  cent,  it  appears  as  a  first  cause. 
Facts  so  prodigious  as  these  should  silence  the  sectarian 
controversies  which  divide  the  advocates  of  temperance,  and 
should  summon  all  intelligent  citizens  to  the  realization  of 

28 


No  Cause  for  Alarm. 

a  common  peril  and  a  common  responsibility.  The  purpose 
of  the  Committee  of  Fifty  will  be  accomplished  if  the  facts 
which  they  have  collected  and  set  forth  may  contribute  in 
any  degree  to  a  more  rational  and  comprehensive  union  of 
the  forces  in  American  life  which  make  for  sobriety,  self- 
control,  good  citizenship,  and  social  responsibility. 

I  cannot  share  Prof.  Peabody's  alarm  concerning 
the  "menace  to  modern  civilization  through  the  abuse 
of  alcoholic  drinks"  or  the  "realization  of  a  common 
peril."  I  refer  to  what  I  said  above,  viz.,  that  the 
abuse  of  alcoholic  drinks  has  been  for  a  long  time 
growing  less  and  continues  to  diminish  owing  to  the 
general  advance  of  the  civilized  nations  along  the 
lines  of  culture.  The  Committee  of  Fifty  itself  bears 
out  this  statement  as  applying  even  within  the  narrow 
limits  of  a  few  generations.  Incomparably  greater  will 
the  progress  along  this  line  appear  if  we  look  back 
centuries  instead  of  generations. 

I  believe  much  can  be  done  by  rational,  sane  treat- 
ment of  the  question,  especially  taking  it,  as  I  have 
tried  to  indicate,  in  connection  with  the  general  prob- 
lems of  health  and  education,  working  for  temperance 
in  all  things  among  adults,  and  bringing  up  children 
free  from  the  inclination  to  excess,  not  requiring  con- 
scious self-restraint  To  this  should,  of  course,  be 
added  the  general  betterment  of  social  conditions,  re- 
moving the  haunting  fear  of  poverty  and  distress  from 
the  working  classes  and  giving  them  environment  that 
shall  make  them  realize  more  powerfully  their  dignity 
as  men  belonging  to  a  stage  of  culture  far  above  the 
primitive  animal  status,  with  that  moral  responsibility 
which  comes  only  with  the  advance  of  civilization. 

But  there  is  no  cause  for  alarm.  On  the  contrary, 
there  is  cause  for  congratulation.  The  most  serious 
stumbling  block  in  the  evolution  of  temperance  is  the 
hysteria  of  the  anti-alcoholists  whose  intemperate  ut- 
terances and  irrational  conduct  tend  only  to  generate 

29 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

intemperance  in  thought,  speech  and  action  which  can- 
not fail  to  react  unfavorably  and  promote  rather  than 
curb  intemperance  in  drink,  by  upsetting  the  mental, 
moral  and  nervous  balance  of  those  on  whom  they 
make  an  impression. 

Heroic  Work  by  the  Texas  Brewers'  Ass'n. 

It  can  be  done.    Look  at  Texas ! 

Galveston,  Tex.,  Dec.  22,   1905. 
MR.  B.  ADOUE,  Chairman  Texas  Brewers'  Association,  City. 

Dear  Sir: — Six  months  ago  for  account  of  the  Texas 
Brewers'  Association,  we  undertook  to  demonstrate  that 
persons  engaged  in  the  sale  of  liquors  at  retail,  in  this  city, 
could  be  induced  to  obey  the  law  regulating  the  sale  of  in- 
toxicants. This  we  claim  to  have  accomplished  so  far  as 
our  detectives  have  been  able  to  discover,  and  they  are  con- 
stantly on  watch. 

1.  There   is   now   no  gambling   or   policy  shop  connected 
with  any  saloon  or  place  where  liquors  are  sold. 

2.  No  liquors  are  now  being  sold   to  minors,  without  a 
written  order  from  parents,  according  to  law. 

3.  Very  little,  if  any,  whiskey  is  sold  without  license. 

4.  Lewd   women   are  not  permitted  to   enter  and   remain 
in  places  where  liquors   are  sold;  no   dance  halls. 

5.  The  midnight  closing  ordinance,  passed  by  the  County 
Commissioners   at  the   instance  of  this   association,   is  being 
strictly  enforced,  and  the  result  thereof  is  greatly  beneficial 
to  the  public  peace. 

6.  The   Mascot   Variety  Theatre  was   permanently  closed 
by  the  association  after  a  stubborn  fight. 

7.  Seven   gambling  houses   for  whites   and   four  for  ne- 
groes were  permanently  closed  as  a  result  of  our  campaign. 

8.  Several  thousand  dollars  were  collected  in  liquor  deal- 
ers'  licenses   by  the   county  and   state  as  the  result  of  the 
work  of  our  detectives. 

9.  Complaints   against    saloon-keepers    have   been    reduced 
to  the  minimum,  and  immediate  relief  is  given  when  com- 
plaint   is    filed    with    Secretary    Paget,    No.    2114    Mechanic 
street,   in   this   city.     Respectfully   submitted, 

WHEELER  &  CLOUGH, 
Attorneys    for   Texas   Brewers'    Association. 

30 


Death's  Head  at  the  Feast. 

Mr.  Adoue,  whom  I  have  on  a  previous  occasion 
called  the  grand  old  man  of  the  brewing  trade  of 
Texas,  says  in  a  letter  concerning  the  above  report: 
"This  is  an  indisputable  statement.  If  all  the  United 
States  brewers  would  apply  the  same  methods  the 
beer  trade  would  soon  become  as  "clean"  as  any 
other  respectable  business,  and  prohibitionists  would 
have  no  ground  to  stand  on.  The  brewers  have  the 
power  of  doing  what  public  officials  refuse  to  do.  Why 
not  do  it?" 

In  another  letter  Mr.  Adoue  says:  "No  trouble 
whatever  is  experienced  with  respectable,  intelligent 
saloon-keepers,  and  they  are  in  the  large  majority.  It  is 
the  ignorant,  vicious  keeper  who  causes  all  the  trouble. 
They  are  not  numerous,  but  it  requires  only  a  few 
of  them  to  give  a  bad  repute  to  all  engaged  in  the 
business.  Texas  is  a  large  state,  our  work  is  very 
extensive,  and  the  expenses  of  the  association  exceed 
$10,000  monthly.  No  stronger  proof  can  be  given  of 
the  earnestness  and  sincerity  of  the  reform  work  now 
being  carried  on  by  the  Texas  Brewers'  Association." 

(March   i,   1906.) 

The  Preponderance  of  Evidence  and  Authority  is 

Decidedly  in  Favor  of  the  Temperate  Use 

of  Mild  Fermented  Beverages, 

"Death's  Head  at  the  Feast."  Under  this  ghastly 
headline  the  Chicago  Chronicle  printed  an  editorial 
article,  the  subject  of  which  was  the  fact  that  at  the 
Washington's  birthday  banquet  of  the  Union  League 
Club  of  Chicago  two  of  the  guests  were  seized  with 
apoplectic  symptoms,  one  remaining  for  a  while  in  a 
critical  condition,  and  this  happened  before  they  had 
had  much  to  eat. 

I  have  not  read  of  any  sermon  being  preached  on 
this  subject,  or  anyone  being  rebuked  for  having 

31 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

habitually  abused  himself  by  over-eating  and  irrational 
eating  so  as  to  bring  on  a  state  of  health  that  would 
lead  to  collapse  at  such  a  time.  Had  a  man  collapsed 
in  a  barroom,  there  would  have  been  eloquent  tirades 
against  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink.  And,  possibly,  the 
zealots  may  yet  discover  the  liquor  dealer  on  whom  to 
lay  the  burden.  No  doubt,  both  men  would  be  glad 
to  get  out  of  it  by  blaming  it  on  "liquor." 

No,  gentlemen,  it  is  not  liquor.  It  is  just  plain 
foolish  eating. 

In  his  very  gracious  letter  which  I  printed  in  the 
February  issue  of  the  American  Brewers'  Review,  Pro- 
fessor Henry  W.  Farnam,  of  Yale  University,  said 
that  the  subjects  of  my  first  "Talks  on  Beer  and  Tem- 
perance," viz.,  the  "Psychic  Influence  of  Food  and 
Drink"  and  "Intemperance  in  Food  Causes  More 
Distress  than  Intemperance  in  Drink"  had  not  been 
neglected  by  scientists,  and  he  referred  to  the  book 
of  Professor  R.  H.  Chittenden,  also  of  Yale  and  a 
member  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty,  called  "Physiolog- 
ical Economy  in  Nutrition/'  in  that  connection. 

Professor  Chittenden  there  shows  by  a  most  interest- 
ing series  of  experiments  that  it  is  possible  to  live 
and  maintain  strength  and  normal  body-weight,  to- 
gether with  mental  vigor,  on  less  than  half  the  amount 
of  proteid  food  laid  down  as  necessary  in  the  standard 
dietaries  hitherto  accepted  as  authoritative,  which 
standards  are  probably  largely  exceeded  by  many  people. 
And  this  does  not  necessitate  any  increase  of  other 
foods,  either.  In  fact,  the  tendency  of  the  experiments 
is  that  a  marked  improvement  in  health,  muscular 
power  and  mental  buoyancy  is  attained  under  such  a 
regimen.  Prof.  Chittenden,  however,  does  not  follow 
the  reasoning  (so-called)  of  the  anti-alcoholist  by  say- 
ing, "Away  with  proteid  food  altogether!"  He  says 
repeatedly  that  he  does  not  advocate  prohibition,  but 

32 


Too  Much  Proteid  Food. 

moderation.  Neither  does  he  incline  to  vegetarianism. 
It  matters  not  whether  the  proteid  is  animal  or  vege- 
table. Naturally,  however,  his  results  tend  to  reduce 
the  amount  of  meat  to  be  eaten,  meat  being  the  chief 
proteid  food  that  we  use. 

I  see  in  these  results  the  finest  confirmation  of  my 
previous  articles.  The  empirical  dietary  standards,  the 
proteid  amounts  of  which  Prof.  Chittenden  wishes 
to  cut  in  half  even  for  those  called  upon  for  the  most 
intense  physical  exertion,  as  college  athletes,  are  large- 
ly of  European  origin.  Now,  Europeans  eat  vastly 
less  meat  than  Americans.  Probably,  the  average 
American,  eating  meat  three  times  a  day,  greatly  ex- 
ceeds the  accepted  amount  of  permissible  proteid.  In 
his  case,  it  is  fair  to  believe,  the  quantity  could  be  cut 
down  to  one-third  of  the  customary  amount. 

How  does  this  bear  on  "Beer  and  Temperance"? 

This  enormous  excess  of  proteid  food  over  the  re- 
quirements of  the  body  causes  a  waste  of  energy,  con- 
sequent lassitude,  thirst,  false  appetite,  nervous  dis- 
comfort, dyspepsia,  to  say  nothing  of  the  probable  sus- 
ceptibility to  disease  from  the  presence  of  broken-down 
albuminous  matter  in  the  system.  It  probably  'has 
much  to  do  with  the  American  taste  for  highly  seasoned 
food,  the  excessive  amounts  of  pepper,  catsups,  biting 
sauces  of  all  kinds. 

I  refer  to  Dr.  Chittenden's  book  in  this  place 
to  support  my  statement  in  previous  articles  that  we 
all  eat  too  much  in  quantity  and  eat  irrationally,  i.  e., 
we  do  not  select  our  food  properly,  as  shown  by  the 
enormous  excess  of  proteid  food.  This  being  true,  and 
the  truth  being  practically  universal,  is  not  the  lack 
of  perfect  health  and  the  nervous  irritation  consequent 
on  it  abundant  ground  to  account  for  by  far  a  greater 
amount  of  insanity,  crime  and  poverty  than  the  com- 
paratively small  amount  of  alcoholic  liquor  consumed? 

33 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

Unfortunately,  as  I  said,  in  the  present  state  of  knowl- 
edge, the  effects  of  irrational  eating  cannot  be  clearly 
traced,  especially  as  not  one  person  in  a  thousand  is 
capable  of  directly  following  up  his  state  of  health  in 
connection  with  his  dietary.  Neither  has  any  compre- 
hensive effort  ever  been  made  to  trace  out  the  social, 
economic  and  psychic  effects  of  the  abuse  of  the  body 
through  the  stomach.  It  is  a  silent,  insidious  cause 
that  does  not  advertise  itself  from  the  housetops  like 
the  frenzy  of  the  drunkard,  and  hence,  although  far 
more  dangerous,  is  generally  ignored. 

I  find,  however,  next  to  nothing  in  Prof.  Chittenden's 
book  concerning  the  importance  of  the  psychic  in- 
fluence of  food  and  drink,  beyond  a  reference  to  the 
desirability  of  absence  of  restraint  in  the  selection  of 
food,  and  similar  matters  incidentally  and  briefly  re- 
ferred to.  Yet  this  highly  important  consideration 
seems  to  me  to  incline  the  general  balance  strongly 
in  favor  of  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages — temperarely, 
of  course. 

The  physiological  sub-committee  of  the  Committee 
of  Fifty,  consisting  of  Prof.  W.  O.  Atwater,  Wesleyan 
University;  John  S.  Billings,  Astor  Library;  Prof. 
H.  B.  Bowditch,  Harvard  Medical  School;  Prof.  R. 
H.  Chittenden,  Sheffield  Scientific  School  (Yale)  ;  and 
Dr.  W.  H.  Welch,  Johns  Hopkins  Hospital,  lays  down 
its  conclusion  that  the  amount  of  alcoholic  drink  which 
can  be  used  freely  by  the  average  adult  without  pro- 
ducing bad  results  is  probably,  at  a  minimum  estimate, 
a  glass  of  wine  or  a  pint  of  beer  a  day.  The  English 
standard  by  Anstie  is  half  a  bottle  of  claret  or  Rhine 
wine,  or  four  glasses  of  beer — English  beer,  containing 
more  alcohol  than  American. 

This  statement  is  based  wholly  on  the  physical  con- 
ditions. 

34 


Moral  Perversion  of  Anti-Alcoholists. 

Taking  this  very  modest  allowance,  we  have  at 
least,  on  purely  physiological  grounds,  and  on  behalf 
of  authorities  which  are  certainly  not  biased  in  favor 
of  alcohol,  a  decided  balance  in  favor  of  the  claim  that 
the  temperate  use  of  alcohol  is  not  harmful  to  normal 
individuals.  If  we  add  to  this  the  considerations  set 
forth  in  my  previous  articles,  as  to  the  importance  of 
the  psychical  element,  the  good  cheer,  the  heightened 
spirits,  the  flow  of  conversation,  the  good-fellowship, 
the  general  enjoyment  of  it  all — there  is  a  preponder- 
ance of  such  magnitude  and  weight  that  the  case  may 
properly  be  considered  closed  and  decided  definitely 
in  favor  of  the  use  of  mild  fermented  beverages.  The 
fact  that  a  certain  amount  of  abuse  is  made  of  these 
beverages  does  not  affect  the  question.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  food,  and  no  sane  person  would  suggest  a 
genejal  prohibition  of  eating  because  some  people  have 
apoplexy  at  a  banquet  or  because  many  are  chronically 
in  a  subnormal  state  of  health  from  irrational  eating. 

The  Atmosphere  of  Moral  Perversity  Generated  by 
the  Anti-Alcoholist. 

I  attended  a  New  Year's  Eve  party  at  the  house  of  a 
friend.  The  people  present  were  of  the  middle  class, 
intelligent,  normally  free  from  prejudice,  healthy  and 
given  to  a  rational  appreciation  of  the  joy  of  living.  . 

A  glass  of  wine  was  served. 

No  sooner  did  they  have  the  glasses  in  their  hands 
than  they  began  to  tell  stories  of  drunken  people. 

Why  were  such  stories  told?  What  is  there  about 
a  glass  of  wine  to  suggest  drunkenness,  any  more  than 
sitting  down  to  a  meal  should  suggest  the  slab  at  the 
hospital  and  an  operation  for  appendicitis? 

It  is  simply  that  extraordinary,  unwholesome  moral 
atmosphere  in  regard  to  the  drink  question  which  has 
been  generated  by  half  a  century  of  unreasonable  agita- 

35 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

tion,   absurd   exaggeration   and   misrepresentation   on 
the  part  of  the  anti-drink  zealots. 

It  occurred  to  me  that  this  was  a  good  illustration 
of  the  statement  I  have  repeatedly  made,  that  this 
irrational  attitude  of  the  anti-alcoholists  creates  an 
artificial,  unnatural  association  of  the  ideas  of  rational 
use  and  irrational  excess,  and  thus  promotes  intemper- 
ance. To  a  normal  mind  in  a  normal  environment  it 
would  never  occur  to  think  of  drunkenness  in  connec- 
tion with  a  social  glass  of  wine,  any  more  than  at  a 
meal  it  would  occur  to  think  of  a  feast  of  Lucullus 
with  asafoetida  as  an  evacuator  of  the  stomach  and 
similar  delectable  performances.  By  establishing  this 
association  of  ideas,  these  people,  to  whose  natures 
temperance  is  unknown,  create  a  tendency  to  intemper- 
ance which  is  not  present  normally.  Fear  of  disease 
weakens  the  system  and  opens  the  portals  for  in- 
fection. Fear  of  intemperance  is  likely  to  work  in  a 
similar  manner. 

Let  us  drink  as  we  should  eat,  normally,  rationally, 
temperately.  Banish  the  fear  of  the  hospital  and  the 
death's  head  from  our  tables,  and  we  shall  enjoy  our 
meal  and  get  the  full  benefit  it  is  capable  of  giving. 
Likewise,  disperse  the  mists  of  moral  perversity  artifi- 
cially generated  by  the  anti-alcoholists,  in  which  to  dis- 
play their  ghastly  pictures  of  poor-house,  insane  asylum 
and  prison  and  other  figments  of  a  disordered  imagina- 
tion, and  we  shall  enjoy  a  glass  of  beer  or  light  wine 
without  the  slightest  fear  or  danger  of  injurious  con- 
sequences. 

I  have  said  before,  and  I  say  again,  the  anti-alco- 
holist  is  a  person  afflicted  with  some  abnormality, 
be  it  physical,  mental  or  moral.  He  has  no'  right  to 
claim  a  higher  morality.  Rather  the  contrary.  His 
is  the  inferior  moral  plane,  the  plane  of  intemperance 

36 


Spiritual  Side  of  the  Question. 

in  thought,  in  speech,  in  action.  Being  himself  ill- 
balanced,  he  seeks  to  overthrow  the  balance  of  others 
and  drag  them  down  to  this  inferior  standard.  In- 
capable of  enjoying  the  good  things  of  the  world  in 
moderation,  he  believes,  or  affects  to  believe,  that  all 
other  people  are  equally  unfortunate,  and  he  wants 
to  put  them  back  into  leading  strings.  Instead  of 
cringing  before  his  self-assumed  but  fictitious  moral 
superiority,  treat  him  as  he  deserves,  put  him  where 
he  belongs,  among  the  children,  the  sick,  the  lame,  and 
the  halting,  give  him  not  of  your  fear,  but  of  your 
pity,  and  tell  him  to  mind  his  own  business. 

(April   i,    1906.) 
The  Spiritual  Side  of  the  Drink  Question  and  the 

Degrading  Materialism  of  the  Anti-Alcoholist. 

There  is  not  only  a  spirituous  but  also  a  spiritual  side 
to  the  drink  question.  And  how  close  they  lie  to- 
gether! The  very  words  suggest  them.  What  in- 
duced the  framers  of  our  language  to  apply  that  word 
which  signified  to  them  the  great  essence  of  the  uni- 
verse and  that  which  seemed  to  them  akin  to  it,  the 
essence  of  man,  also  to  the  essence  that  sleeps  in  the 
grape  and  the  barley-corn  and  leaps  into  life  when  it 
enters  the  human  body?  Why  did  they  call  it  spirit? 
Did  they  not  perceive  the  kinship  between  them? 

The  Growler  has  had  something  to  say  of  the  psy- 
chic effect  of  food  and  drink.  But  he  has  addressed 
himself  largely  to  the  immediate  influence  of  the 
psychical  on  the  physical,  and  dealt  mostly  with  the 
lower  psychical  activities.  But  there  is  a  deeper  mean- 
ing. 

This  reflection  was  suggested  by  reading  in  a  letter 
from  Prof.  Lafayette  B.  Mendel,  of  Yiale  University, 
published  in  Physiological  Aspects  of  the  Liquor  Prob- 
lem, the  following  passage  from  O.  Funke : 

37 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

It  is  foolish  and  unjustifiable  to  put  a  stop  to  even  the 
most  moderate  enjoyment  of  the  aforementioned  stimulus 
(alcoholic  drink).  One  does  not  need  to  have  recourse  to 
the  argument  that  the  inclination  to  acquire  it  in  some  form 
or  other  is  really  the  expression  of  an  inextinguishible  hu- 
man instinct  which  has  made  itself  felt  in  all  ages  and  by  all 
peoples.  One  needs  only  to  ask:  Must  our  machine,  then, 
always  work  in  the  same  monotonous,  tiresome  tempo  as 
the  pendulum  of  a  clock?  What  harm  is  there  if  from  time 
to  time  it  pumps  somewhat  more  quickly  under  a  high  pres- 
sure of  steam  if  subsequently,  during  a  period  of  slower 
work,  it  can  make  good  this  slight  unnecessary  expenditure 
of  force  by  drafts  from  an  abundant  store  of  energy,  and  re- 
pair any  small  damage  which  its  mechanism  may  have  suf- 
fered? It  is  certainly  a  fact  that  many  a  bright  fruitful 
idea  has  been  born  from  a  bumper  of  fragrant  Rhine  wine 
which,  perhaps,  would  never  have  come  from  the  water 
jug  of  a  vegetarian.  Many  a  bitter  heartache,  which  would 
have  eaten  deeper  and  deeper  by  drinking  raspberry  lemon- 
ade, has  been  softened  by  a  nice  cup  of  coffee;  many  a 
trouble,  many  a  care,  has  disappeared  in  the  smoke  of  a 
cigar, — and  that  is  surely  worth  something  in  this  poor  hu- 
man existence. 

Does  that  strike  a  responsive  chord?  Have  you  not 
often  wished  to  be  able  to  get  away  from  the  hum- 
drum of  business,  the  routine  of  public  and  even,  at 
times,  of  home  life?  Have  you  not  asked  yourself, 
if  there  is  really  nothing  else  in  this  world  but  the 
hunt  for  the  dollar?  Have  you  not  longed  for  a  quiet 
retreat,  or  for  the  companionship  of  soul,  to  get  away 
out  of  the  lime  light  of  publicity?  Have  you  not 
gone  out  with  your  wife  to  theater  or  country  or  to 
a  cozy  corner  in  a  comfortable  eating  house,  and  rev- 
eled once  more  in  the  blissfulness  of  exclusive  com- 
panionship, as  you  did  while  you  were  engaged,  or 
almost  so,  and  not  yet  married? 

Is   All   Emotion   Objectionable? 

Should  we  really  never  allow  any  emotion  to  take 
hold  of  us,  to  tug  at  our  heartstrings,  to  send  the  blood 

38 


Joy  of  Living  is  Elevating. 

flowing  more  swiftly  and  strongly  through  our  veins? 
Is  the  athlete  to  be  condemned  for  the  stimulation  of 
his  circulatory  system  and  the  intense  joy  he  feels 
in  this  heightened  consciousness  of  living?  Must  we 
suppress  all  our  enthusiasm  for  great  and  noble 
thoughts  and  heroic  endeavor?  Have  I  done  wrong 
to  be  moved  to  tears  by  the  sight  of  an  Apollo 
Belvidere,  to  sob  at  the  appearance  of  the  knight  of 
the  swan? 

Out  upon  this  utilitarianism,  out  upon  this  nightmare 
of  materialism  which  the  anti-alcoholist  would  force 
upon  us ! 

Here  is  another  quotation.  It  is  from  an  article  by 
Professor  Dr.  Eulenburg,  of  Berlin  University : 

Man  should  not  be  considered  merely  as  a  working  en- 
gine, a  power  engine  (of  only  1/7  horsepower)  but  also 
with  respect  to  other  features  of  his  nature,  notably  as  an 
emotional  being,  often  passionately  emotional,  and  as  a  creat- 
ure gifted  with  imagination,  with  artistic  creative  power. 
For  all  those  strength  tests  in  beast  and  man  and  all  psycho- 
logical experiments  always  gave  as  the  final  result  of  the 
effect  of  alcohol  either  only  a  diminution  of  the  direct  work 
performed  by  the  muscle  or  of  some  functions  lying  within 
the  sphere  of  the  intellect,  the  understanding;  such  diminu- 
tion was  shown  f.  i.  in  the  tests  with  arithmetical  problems, 
memorizing,  "inner"  and  "outer"  associations,  etc.  But  no 
one  has  yet  succeeded  in  fathoming  the  extent  to  which  the 
powers  of  soul  life  slumbering  in  the  depths  of  conscious- 
ness, the  emotions,  the  free  and  fanciful  combination  of  im- 
pressions received,  the  synthetic,  creative,  poetic  and  forma- 
tive, in  fact  all  artistic  activity  may  under  similar  influ- 
ences be  stimulated,  fructified  or  awakened  and  set  free. 
These  are  matters  which,  for  the  present,  lie  beyond  the  reach 
of  weights  and  measures,  and  here  the  undeniable  heavy  debit 
account  of  alcohol  possesses  a  partly  discharging  credit  ac- 
count. 


39 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

He  who  Destroys  the  Joy  of  Life  Is  the  Real  Author 
of  Crime  and  Misery. 

This  may  be  considered  a  strange  indictment  I  am 
bringing  against  the  anti-alcoholist.  I  charge  him  who 
would  deprive  us  of  part  of  the  joy  of  living,  with 
being  the  real  promoter  of  misery,  of  crime,  of  in- 
sanity, of  poverty,  of  all  those  things  which  are,  to  a 
great  extent,  the  results  of  spiritual  starvation. 

Time  was  when  the  enjoyment  of  physical  existence 
was  the  chief  aim  of  living  men.  With  the  growth  of 
higher  moral  ideas  came  the  knowledge  that  this  could 
not  be  all  there  was  in  life.  Unrest  took  hold  of  the 
ancient  world,  there  were  protests  against  the  sensual 
life  on  the  one  hand,  while  the  great  accumulations  of 
wealth  led  to  greater  indulgence  on  the  other  hand. 
Out  of  the  mysticism  of  the  East  came  the  great  re- 
ligious revolution,  and  the  medieval  church,  going  to 
the  opposite  extreme,  condemned  all  enjoyment  of 
physical  existence. 

In  the  present  day  we  are  beginning  to  see  that  here, 
as  in  other  things,  truth  lies  midway — temperance. 
We  see  that  the  men  of  the  middle  ages  went  too  far 
in  the  reaction  from  extreme  sensuality  when  they  con- 
trasted the  "prince  of  this  world"  with  the  prince  of 
the  spiritual  world  and  condemned  all  enjoyment  of 
life  as  being  of  the  flesh  and  the  devil.  We  are  be- 
ginning to  see  as,  according  to  the  biblical  account, 
the  Creator  saw  in  the  beginning,  that  the  world  is 
good,  and  we,  being  in  and  of  the  world,  have  a  right 
to  enjoy  it,  not  in  the  old  animal  and  sensual  way,  by 
abandoning  ourselves  to  the  lusts  of  the  flesh,  but  in 
that  temperate  way  which  becomes  civilized  man. 

The  anti-alcoholist  has  taken  only  the  first  step  from 
the  ancient  days.  He  remains  standing  on  the  ground 
of  medieval  morality.  For  him  there  is  either  swinish 

40 


Materialism  of  the  "Antis." 

indulgence  or  ascetic  abstinence  and  self-mortification. 
He  has  not  yet  taken  the  second  step  which  would 
place  him  in  the  full  sunlight  of  modern  ethical  thought 
recognizing  the  propriety  of  temperately  enjoying  this 
world  as  not  only  compatible  with,  but  conducive  to, 
the  development  of  the  highest  faculties  of  man.  It 
always  ends  in  the  same  thought — temperance. 

Materialism  of  the  Anti-Alcoholist. 

The  tendency  of  the  anti-alcoholist  movement  is  es- 
sentially materialistic  and  anti-spiritual.  Is  it  really 
so  important  that  one  should  keep  oneself  keyed  up  con- 
stantly to  the  highest  pitch  of  economic  efficiency  ?  Is 
there  really  nothing  in  the  world  but  business  or  pro- 
fessional success?  Must  we  live  everlastingly  in  that 
tedious  humdrum  of  our  everyday  occupations  ?  I  have 
been  told  that  in  a  certain  great  watch  factory  it  is 
impossible  to  keep  a  person  at  a  certain  kind  of  work — 
driving  rivets,  I  think  it  is — for  more  than  two  or 
three  months ;  if  he  stays  longer  he  goes  insane.  That 
is  an  extreme  case.  But  is  not  the  effect  of  everyday 
life,  uninterrupted  by  a  frequent  awakening  and  ex- 
ercise of  soul-life,  somewhat  similar? 

What  else  is  it  than  a  degrading  materialism  to 
hold  before  us  as  the  worthiest  end  of  our  ambition 
business  success,  wealth,  power  ?  That  is  the  tendency 
of  those  persons  who  exult  in  the  action  of  railroads 
forbidding  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink  to  their  em- 
ployes ;  the  same  railroads  and  corporations  which  will 
not  employ  men  over  35  or  40  years  of  age,  when 
men  are  in  their  prime,  because  they  are  not  reckless 
enough  in  taking  chances  with  the  lives  of  passengers 
or  the  property  of  customers.  They  must  have  young 
men  of  "nerve"  to  take  out  their  great  engines  dash- 

41 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

ing  through  the  night,  with  a  trainload  of  sleeping  hu- 
manity behind  them. 

You  cannot  drag  down  to  that  degrading  materialism 
the  man  who  breaks  away  often  from  the  jog-trot  of 
his  daily  work,  who  turns  his  thoughts  to  higher  and 
better  things  than  the  dollar,  who  enjoys  the  com- 
panionship of  kindred  souls  or  of  those  against  whom 
he  can  sharpen  his  wits.  In  a  word,  the  man  who  en- 
joys! He  is  the  man  who  creates,  who  helps  develop 
the  spiritual  in  himself  and  others. 

The  Joy  of  Living  has  an  Elevating  Influence. 

I  am  speaking  of  holding  out  this  low  ideal  as  a 
demoralizing  force,  largely  responsible  for  the  low  tone 
of  business  morality  so  prevalent  to-day.  I  am  not 
admitting,  however,  that  the  abstainer  really  does  fit 
himself  better  for  the  economic  struggle  than  does  he 
who  indulges  temperately  in  alcoholic  beverages. 
On  the  contrary,  even  though  it  were  true — which 
it  is  not — that  such  temperate  use  diminished 
the  strength,  the  mere  fact  of  enhancing  the  enjoy- 
ment of  living  has  such  a  powerfully  elevating  and 
strengthening  effect,  both  mentally  and  physically,  that 
any  little  injury  done  is  much  more  than  compensated. 
The  man  to  whom  alcoholic  drink  is  a  relish,  a  condi- 
ment, a  something  that  adds  to  the  joy  of  physiological 
functions,  that  animates  social  and  spiritual  intercourse, 
possesses  a  buoyancy  by  virtue  of  these  things  which 
the  other,  groveling  forever  in  the  metallic  dust,  can 
never  feel  or  appreciate.  The  withholding  of  this 
spice  of  life,  the  physical  starvation  it  would  bring 
about,  would  create  an  amount  of  crime,  insanity,  gen- 
eral misery  and  a  universal  lowering  of  morals  which 
one  must  shudder  to  imagine.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
relish  of  mere  living,  the  heightening  of  the  spirits, 
the  stimulation  of  the  imagination,  the  contemplation 

42 


Liebig's  Statement  as  to  Beer. 

of  ideas  above  the  sordid  occupations  of  stale  bread- 
and-butter  work  or  the  machinations  for  business  suc- 
cess, these  things,  as  promoted  by  the  temperate  use 
of  an  alcoholic  condiment,  constitute  a  positive 
dynamic  influence  for  the  elevation  of  mankind. 

(May,  1906.) 

Disposing  of  that  Quotation  from  Liebig  as  to  the 
Lack  of  Nutriment  in  Beer. 

There  is  an  oft  repeated  pretended  quotation  from 
Liebig,  the  great  German  chemist,  on  which  the  anti- 
alcoholists  strongly  rely.  It  may  be  well  to  dispose  of 
that  misquotation. 

The  report  of  the  Sub-Committee  of  the  Committee 
of  Fifty  on  the  Physiological  Aspects  of  the  Liquor 
Problem  contains  a  part  devoted  to  the  so-called 
"scientific  temperance  instruction"  with  which  the 
minds  of  our  youth  are  being  poisoned  and  their  char- 
acters perverted  quite  generally  in  our  public  schools. 
This  part  was  prepared  by  Dr.  H.  P.  Bowditch,  of  the 
Harvard  Medical  School,  of  Boston,  and 'Prof.  C.  F. 
Hodge,  of  Clark  University,  Worcester,  Mass.,  and 
approved  by  the  Sub-Committee  on  the  Physiological 
and  Pathological  Aspects  of  the  Drink  Problem,  con- 
sisting, in  addition  to  the  two  gentlemen  named,  of 
Dr.  J.  S.  Billings,  U.  S.  Army,  Director  of  the  Medical 
Museum  and  Library,  Washington :  General  Francis 
A.  Walker,  President  of  the  Massachusetts  Institute 
of  Technology:  Professor  R.  H.  Chittenden,  of  the 
Sheffield  Scientific  School  of  Yale  University:  Dr. 
William  H.  Welch,  Professor  of  Pathology  in  Johns 
Hopkins  University,  Baltimore ;  Dr.  G.  Alder  Blumer, 
Director  of  the  State  Insane  Asylum,  Utica,  N.  Y. ; 
and  the  late  Dr.  W.  O.  Atwater,  Professor  of  Chem- 
istry in  Wesleyan  University,  Middletown,  Conn. 

43 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

Finally,  the  report  received  the  approval  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Fifty  as  a  whole. 

In  the  discussion  of  these  "legalized  lies"  which, 
owing  to  the  ignorance  and  cowardice  of  so  many  state 
legislatures,  are  being  taught  in  our  public  schools  to 
the  demoralization  of  the  young,  the  report  says : 

Another  illustration  of  the  way  in  which  the  method  of 
partial  quotation  of  scientific  authorities  is  employed  to  serve 
the  purposes  of  the  Woman's  Christian  Temperance  Union 
is  furnished  by  the  use  made  of  Liebig's  statement  as  to  the 
nutritive  value  of  beer,  often  quoted  in  the  school  physiol- 
ogy journals  and  similar  publications. 

It  reads  as  follows : 

"We  can  prove  with  mathematical  certainty  that  as  much 
flour  as  can  lie  on  the  point  of  a  table  knife  is  more  nutri- 
tious than  eight  quarts  of  the  best  Bavarian  beer." 

This  statement  occurs  in  a  rare  edition  of  LIEBIG'S  Chem- 
ical Letters  published  in  1852,  and  in  no  previous  or  subse- 
quent editions.  It  is  well  known  that  LIEBIG  divided  all  food 
substances  into  two  groups,  viz. :  nitrogenous  or  plastic 
foods  and  non-nitrogenous  or  respiratory  foods.  While  we 
have  not  been  able  to  see  the  edition  in  which  this  state- 
ment occurs,  it  is  evident  from  what  we  have  learned  of  it 
and  from,  statements  in  the  same  connection  in  other  edi- 
tions, that  LIEBIG,  in  making  this  statement,  must  have  had 
in  mind  the  nitrogenous  ingredients  of  beer.  To  this  group 
he  attached  the  greater  physiological  importance,  believing 
them  to  be  the  sole  source  of  mechanical  energy  of  the  body, 
while  the  latter  group  served  for  the  production  of  animal 
heat.  This  distinction  cannot  be  maintained  in  the  light  of 
later  investigations.  That  LIEBIG  clearly  had  it  in  mind, 
however,  in  writing  the  above  paragraph,  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  he  elsewhere  mentions  specifically  alcohol,  beer, 
and  wine  as  "respiratory  foods/'  It  is,  therefore,  evident, 
that  to  make  the  above  statement  accurately  express  LIEBIG'S 
view,  it  should  be  altered  so  as  to  read  "contains  more  ni- 
trogenous nutriment  than  eight  quarts,"  etc.  Taken  by  it- 
self, it  entirely  misrepresents  Liebig's  position* 


*Italics  are  mine. 

44 


Misrepresents  Liebig's  View. 

R.  O.  NEUMANN  calls  attention  to  the  above  quotation 
from  LIEBIG  in  an  article  on  the  Significance  of  Alcohol  as 
Food  in  the  Archiv  fur  Hygiene,  1899,  Vol.  xxxvi,  pp.  2,  3, 
He  gives  the  quotation  in  more  detail  as  follows : 

"As  much  flour  as  can  be  held  on  the  point  of  a  knife- 
blade  is  more  nutritious  than  five  (Bavarian)  quarts  of  the 
best  Bavarian  beer.  A  man  who  should  be  in  condition  to 
drink  daily  five  quarts  of  beer  would  thus  have  in  a  year, 
under  favorable  circumstances,  exactly  as  much  nutritive 
material  as  in  a  five-pound  loaf  of  bread  or  in  three  pounds 
of  meat." 

A  calculation  based  on  the  combustion  warmth  of  starch 
leads  NEUMANN  to  the  conclusion  that,  in  this  estimate  of 
the  nutritive  value  of  beer,  Liebig  has  committed  an  error 
of  over  8,000  per  cent. 

He  notes,  however,  that,  seven  years  later,  LIEBIG,  as  the 
results  of  his  experiments  in  metabolism,  reached  the  con- 
clusion that  alcohol  in  its  value  as  a  respiratory  food,  stands 
nearest  to  the  fats. 

I  can  remember  well  enough  that,  when  I  was  a 
boy,  nitrogenous  or  plastic  food  was  the  only  kind 
actually  considered  as  "food,"  and  we  find  a  similar 
idea  prevailing  among  athletes  and  their  trainers  to- 
day, who,  in  order  to  build  up  musclej  insist  on  eating 
enormous  proportions  of  meat.  Nitrogenous  food  was 
food  par  excellence.  When  Liebig  spoke  of  food,  that 
is  what  he  meant. 

It  is  further  probable  from  the  above  quotation  that 
Liebig  realized  how  his  statement  could  be  miscon- 
strued, and  hence  it  was  omitted  from  later  editions. 
It  is,  therefore,  not  Liebig' s  opinion  at  all,  or  was 
such,  at  best,  transiently  even  in  the  restricted  sense 
which  it  properly  bears. 

This  is  all  that  remains  of  the  famous  quotation  from 
Liebig  which,  as  the  anti-drink  "fans"  claim,  "has  never 
been  refuted." 

It  should  be  added  that  the  fats  are  held  to  be  the 
greatest  producers  of  energy,  standing  higher  than  the 

45 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

carbohydrates.  Liebig,  therefore,  by  placing  alcohol 
as  a  respiratory  food  nearest  to  the  fats,  puts  it  above 
the  carbohydrates  in  nutritive  value. 

More    "Disheartening    Results"    from    Letters    to 
Prominent  Men. 

The  anti-alcoholist  papers  inform  their  readers  that 
the  results  from  my  letters  to  members  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Fifty  have  been  disheartening. 

I  could  stand  a  lot  more  of  that  sort  of  "dishearten- 
ing" results. 

And,  by  the  way,  there  are  some  more.  For  instance, 
Dr.  H.  P.  Bowditch,  of  the  Harvard  Medical  School, 
wrote  under  date  of  February  14,  1906: 

I  am  in  receipt  of  your  letter  of  February  9,  1906,  and 
am  very  glad  to  be  able  to  agree  with  you  as  to  many  of 
the  points  to  which  you  refer.  In  my  experience  I  have 
found  the  real  obstacles  to  rational  temperance  movements 
to  lie  in  the  fact  that  fanatical  total  abstinence  agitators  are 
apt  to  combine  with  dealers  in  intoxicating  liquors  in  defeat- 
ing moderate  measures  looking  towards  a  reform  in  the  use 
of  alcohol.  That,  at  least,  has  been  our  experience  here  in 
Massachusetts. 

There  is  also  a  letter  from  Dr.  Pereira  Mendes,  of 
New  York,  which,  although  not  written  as  lucidly  as 
one  might  desire,  owing,  no  doubt,  to  condensation,  is 
nevertheless  interesting  and-  indorses  the  "Growler's" 
attitude  heartily.  Here  it  is : 

New  York,  February  16,  1906. — I  cannot  commend  too 
highly  your  attitude  on  the  alcohol  question.  Its  insidious 
action  cannot  be  too  carefully  and  constantly  resisted. 

We  have  passed  from  the  age  of  every  gentleman  drink- 
ing his  bottle  at  his  dinner  and  so  proving  himself  to  be  a 
gentleman.  I  trust  we  will  speedily  pass  from  the  present 
age  of  "Have  a  drink,"  as  a  proof  of  geniality  and  comrade- 
ship. 

Alcohol,  in  my  opinion,  should  be  used  only  as  advised  by 
physicians,  and  should  be  sold  only  by  druggists.  Its  use 

46 


California   Wines  and  Beer. 

should  be  under  the  strictest  control  when  in  the  form  of 
whiskey  or  other  spirits.  Wine,  not  containing  a  high  per- 
centage of  alcohol,  needs  restrictions  less  stringent.  The 
abolition  of  the  use  of  wines  and  spirits  is  one  thing.  Their 
proper  use  is  another. 

Whatever  we  extract  from  God's  gifts  to  man  is  meant 
for  a  blessing,  and  should  be  so  used.  But  when  we  abuse 
any  one  of  them,  then  the  blessing  becomes  a  curse.  Hence 
the  necessity  for  wise  restriction.  Faithfully  yours, 

H.   PEREIRA  MENDES, 
Minister  Spanish  and  Portuguese   Congregation,   New   York 

City. 

As  to  the  Statement  Concerning  California  Wines 
and  Beer. 

And,  now,  as  to  the  letter  of  President  Eliot.  It 
was  my  intention  to  say  nothing  more  about  that  mat- 
ter since  Dr.  Eliot  virtually  abandoned  his  contention. 
A  writer  in  a  California  paper  a  short  time  ago  quoted 
triumphantly  Dr.  Eliot's  statement  that  "a  cheap  and 
good  provision  of  beer  and  light  wine  will  not  pre- 
vent Teutonic  people  from  drinking  distilled  liquor  to 
excess.  On  this  point  see  the  experience  of  Califor- 
nia." The  article,  however,  was  too  utterly  silly  to 
merit  a  reply,  and  the  medium  in  which  it  appeared, 
was  not  of  sufficient  consequence  to  call  for  refuta- 
tion. But  now  the  statement  is  quoted  again  and  is 
likely  to  go  the  rounds  of  the  prohibition  press. 

It  therefore  becomes  necessary  to  state  that  the 
''Growler"  did  not  let  the  matter  rest  with  Dr.  Eliot's 
statement.  As  I  do  not  want  to  follow  the  fashion  of 
the  anti-alcoholists,  of  publishing  garbled  extracts,  I 
will  here  give  the  correspondence  in  full.  All  I  have 
to  say  about  it  is  that  a  little  slip  is  liable  to  happen 
to  anybody,  even  to  the  president  of  a  great  university. 
Quandoque  bonus  dorniitat  Homerus. 

CHICAGO,  ILL.,  FEBRUARY  7th,  1906. — CHAS.  W.  ELIOT,  Esq., 
President  Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass. — Dear  Sir: 

47 


The  Rule  of  "ttot  Too  Much.3' 

In  your  letter  of  January  8th,  you  have  this  passage:  "A 
cheap  and  good  provision  of  beer  and  light  wine  will  not 
prevent  Teutonic  peoples  from  drinking  distilled  liquors  to 
excess.  On  this  point  see  the  experience  of  California." 

I  would  like  to  know  to  what  experience  of  California 
you  refer.  I  have  been  unable  to  find  anything  in  the  litera- 
ture on  this  subject. 

Thanking  you  for  your  kindness  and  attention,  I  remain, 

Yours  very  truly, 

HARVARD  UNIVERSITY,  CAMBRIDGE,  MARCH  9,  1906. — Dear 
Sir:  I  believe  the  experience  of  California  shows  that  the 
cheapness  of  wine  in  California  has  not  diminished  the  con- 
sumption of  whiskey  and  other  distilled  liquors.  The  num- 
ber of  United  States  licenses  in  California  in  comparison 
with  the  number  in  other  states  would  shed  some  light  on  this 
subject.  Perhaps  you  could  find  some  statistics  concerning 
the  consumption  of  distilled  liquor  in  California  as  compared 
with  the  rest  of  the  country  in  the  Internal  Revenue  Reports 
and  Census.  Very  truly  yours, 

CHARLES  W.  ELIOT. 

CHICAGO,  ILL.,  MARCH  i2th,  1906. — CHARLES  W.  ELIOT, 
LL.D.,  President  Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass. — 
Dear  Sir:  I  thank  you  cordially  for  your  letter  of  the  9th 
inst.  referring  to  the  experience  of  California  in  regard  to 
the  question  whether  the  cheapness  of  wine  has  diminished 
the  consumption  of  distilled  liquors.  I  shall  make  an  effort 
to  investigate  this  subject,  although  it  is,  of  course,  extreme- 
ly difficult  to  arrive  at  any  conclusions  in  regard  to  any  sec- 
tion of  the  country  from  the  records  of  the  Internal  Revenue 
office  and  the  Census.  There  is  no  special  tax  stamp  issued 
by  the  United  States  Government  for  the  sale  of  wine  as  dis- 
tinguished from  other  liquors,  such  as,  for  instance,  is  the 
case  with  malt  liquors.  The  consumption  also  is  extremely 
difficult  to  get  at,  especially  when  you  consider  that  brandy 
and  wine  manufactured  in  California  is  shipped  all  over  the 
country.  Another  element  is  the  large  increase  of  popula- 
tion, and  as  all  these  questions  must  necessarily  be  consid- 
ered relative  to  population,  the  whole  subject  is  extremely 
difficult. 

I  thank  you,  however,  for  having  called  my  attention  to 
the  matter,  and  if  I  can  find  anything  definite  enough  to  war- 

48 


Irrational  Eating. 

rant  any  conclusions,  I  shall  take  the  liberty  of  communicat- 
ing  with   you   again. 

Thanking  you  for  your  interest  in  the  matter,  I  remain — 
Yours   respectfully, 

Gluttony  and  Irrational  Eating  as  a  Cause  of  Dis- 
tress and  Unhappiness. 

The  "Growler"  is  charged  by  the  prohibition  pub- 
lications with  trying  to  effect  a  diversion  from  the 
temperance  issue  by  insisting  on  the  far  greater  dangers 
arising  from  irrational  eating  than  from  drink. 

Now,  I  am  aware  that  this  idea  is  comparatively  new 
and  that  the  proof  of  it  is  not  so  readily  accessible, 
although  we  are  surrounded  on  all  hands  by  evidence 
sufficient  to  create  a  strong  moral  conviction  of  its 
truth.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  other  minds,  not 
occupied  with  the  drink  question,  are  beginning  to 
realize  the  mischief  of  irrational  eating,  and  I  want  to 
quote  here  an  editorial  that  appeared  March  24,  in  the 
Chicago  Chronicle  under  the  head  "Gluttony." 

If  a  man  wishes  to  get  on  good  terms  with  a  strange 
horse  he  offers  him  a  nut,  an  apple  or  a  lump  of  sugar. 
This  opens  the  way  for  any  other  familiarities  that  he  may 
desire. 

It  is  singular  how  much  like  horses,  in  this  respect,  men, 
women  and  children  are.  There  is  no  avenue  open  to  the 
human  mind  or  heart  like  that  through  the  stomach.  Thefe 
is  not  a  single  appeal  made  to  human  nature  in  which  there 
is  prejudice,  selfishness  or  inertia  to  be  overcome  in  which 
an  offer  of  something  to  eat  or  drink  is  not  useful,  and  there 
are  not  many  such  cases  in  which  it  is  neglected.  A  drink 
of  liquor  is  called  a  "smile,"  because  it  always  produces  a 
smile  when  it  is  got  free,  and  it  is  no  more  a  smile  with 
drinking  people  than  a  nice  mouthful  of  something  to  eat 
is  with  a  different  class  of  people.  We  are  all  like  so  many 
horses  or  dogs  so  far  as  our  passion  for  free  lunch  is  con- 
cerned. 

People  will  attend  to  all  matters  that  bear  directly  on  their 
own  comfort  or  profit  without  thinking  of  eating,  but  if  a 
matter  affects  them  only  indirectly,  and  remotely,  and  much 

49 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

more  if  they  are  not  interested  in  it  at  all,  nothing  will  in* 
duce  them  to  consider  it  except  something  to*  eat  or  drink. 

This  is  the  rationale  of  the  banquet.  When  matters  oi 
great  importance  require  discussion  and  they  are  not  such 
as  will  make  a  difference  in  a  man's  home  comforts  or  bank 
account  within  a  week  the  only  way  to  get  him  to  consider 
it,  even  by  listening  to  the  opinions  of  others,  is  to  invite 
him  to  a  banquet  at  which  it  is  to  be  discussed.  If  the  dis- 
cussion took  place  in  a  hall  no  one  would  think  of  attending 
it. 

This  means  of  placating  human  nature  is  constantly  re- 
sorted to  in  different  kinds  of  business.  Most  of  us  have 
heard  of  people  being  encouraged  to  buy  drinks  by  offering 
them  without  cost  a  mouthful  of  appetizing  food.  No  real 
estate  dealer  would  take  a  party  of  people  out  of  town  to  sell 
them  a  tract  of  land  without  feeding  them  on  the  way,  and 
even  auctioneers  find  that  people  bid  more  freely  when  some 
sort  of  free  lunch  is  offered  them. 

Is  this  appeal  ever  used  to  advantage  in  religious  affairs? 
Yes,  indeed,  and  oftener  perhaps  than  in  business.  The  mod- 
ern church  must  have  its  kitchen  and  pantry  and  the  meetings 
for  sociable  intercourse  would  be  a  dead  failure  without  a 
supper. 

Where  religious  services  are  held  all  day,  as  they  are  in 
some  churches  in  Chicago  on  Saturdays,  there  is  always 
some  sort  of  luncheon  provided  for  those  who  remain  over 
from  one  meeting  to  another  and  it  is  observed  that  many 
people  attend  both  meetings  for  no  other  purpose  than  to 
remain  over  and  partake  of  the  free  lunch.  There  are  even 
those  who  say  that  something  nice  to  eat  plays  a  part  in  love 
affairs. 

The  strange  thing  about  it  is  that  all  of  these  people  get 
a  plenty  to  eat  at  their  own  homes  and  yet  are  easily 
tempted  to  attend  any  sort  of  gathering  at  which  they  can 
get  a  little  more.  They  cannot  resist  a  doughnut  and  a  cup 
of  coffee  even  if  they  have  a  few  moments  earlier  eaten  a  full 
meal  of  corned  beef  and  cabbage  and  mince  pie.  They  are 
never  too  full  for  any  sort  of  food  or  drink  that  happens 
to  be  offered  free  between  meals. 

It  would  be  well  if  this  were  the  worst  that  could  be 
said  about  this  gluttonous  habit,  but  it  is  not.  The  worst 
thing  about  it  is  that  it  is  gratified  with  a  perfect  contempt 
for  the  rules  of  health.  There  is  no  better  way  for  a  strong 

50 


Pseudo-Scientific  Instruction. 

and  hearty  man  to-  break  down  his  health  than  to  eat  and 
drink  between  meals  and  particularly  between  his  evening 
meal  and  bedtime.  Indeed  few  people  would  ever  do  such 
a  thing  in  their  own  homes  or  at  their  own  expense,  but 
when  they  can  do  it  at  an  entertainment  they  never  fail 
to  improve  the  opportunity. 

One  would  suppose  that  if  every  one  else  were  guilty  of 
such  self-destruction  Christian  people  would  condemn  and 
avoid  it,  but  they  are  sinners  above  all  others.  It  seems  to 
be  an  indispensable  part  of  orthodox  religion  to  attend  church 
sociables  and  receptions  in  the  evening  and  supplement  a  6 
o'clock  dinner  with  fruit  cake,  pie,  oyster  soup  and  coffee, 
so  that  the  dreams  after  retiring  will  rival  all  the  pictures  of 
rarebit  experiences  which  fill  some  of  the  newspapers. 

(July,    1906.) 
That    Pseudo-Scientific     Temperance     Instruction. 

The  talk  of  people  not  wanting  to  "drink  alcohol" 
calls  to  mind  the  pseudo-"scientific  temperance  instruc- 
tion" in  our  public  schools,  where  it  is  taught,  among 
other  "legalized  lies,"  that  because  a  piece  of  dead 
meat  dropped  into  absolute  alcohol  shrivels  up  and  is 
discolored,  therefore  the  human  stomach  is  similarly 
|j  affected  by  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink.  Of  course  the 
difference  between  live  tissue  and  dead  meat,  between 
a  drink  containing,  among  other  constituents,  3^2  per 
cent  of  alcohol,  on  the  one  hand,  and  absolute  alcohol, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  shrewdly  slurred  over  or  sup- 
pressed. And  by  such  wilful  misrepresentation  and 
deceit  is  the  youthful  mind  demoralized. 

This  matter  of  the  training  of  the  youthful  mind  to 
intemperance,  deceit,  sneakiness  and  contempt  for 
authority  and  science,  which  is  brought  about  by  this 
mis-called  "scientific  temperance  instruction,"  is  in  a 
fair  way  of  receiving  an  airing.  Chicago,  less  hampered 
by  tradition  than  many  older  places,  bids  fair  to  be  the 
storm  center  in  this  case. 

The  School  Management  Committee  of  the  Board 
51 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

of  Education  of  Chicago  at  a  recent  session  decided  to 
throw  out  two  text  books  on  physiology  which  had  been 
used  in  the  schools.  In  the  course  of  .the  discussion  a 
member  of  the  Board,  who  is  a  physician,  said  that 
some  of  the  assertions  made  in  the  text  books  are 
"pure  idiocy,"  and  that  any  physician  who  would  en- 
dorse the  material  found  in  these  alleged  instructive 
books  should  be  committed  to  an  insane  asylum.  The 
same  member  also  made  this  statement  "everyone 
knows  the  book  on  intoxicants  was  fixed  up  and  then 
certain  interests  went  to  the  legislature  and  had  the 
law  passed."  The  superintendent  of  schools,  while 
urging  the  members  of  the  committee  not  to  disobey  • 
the  law,  stated  that  he  considered  it  a  foolish  law. 

The  discussion  of  these  text  books  came  in  the  course 
of  a  general  inquiry  into  the  manner  in  which  text 
books  are  selected,  the  object  being  to  discover  whether 
there  were  any  sinister  influence  at  work.  There  were 
intimations  of  "graft." 

The  Growler  has  heard  such  intimations  in  con- 
nection with  these  text  books  on  physiology  which  are 
endorsed  by  the  W.  C.  T.  U.,  but  for  lack  of  proof  has 
not  wished  to  go  into  that  matter.  Anyway  it  is 
quite  unnecessary  for  our  purpose.  It  matters  not 
whether  "graft"  has  anything  to  do  with  the  introduc- 
tion of  these  books,  and,  if  so,  whether  the  parties  en- 
dorsing these  books  share  in  the  spoils,  or  not.  It 
is  quite  sufficient  for  us  to  know  that  the  stuff  which 
they  endorse  is  rank  nonsense.  It  is  also  quite  sufficient 
to  know  that  the  attention  of  the  responsible  persons 
in  the  so-called  "department  of  scientific  temperance 
instruction"  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  has  been  called  by 
the  most  eminent  authority  in  America  to  the  fact  that 
untruthful  statements  are  contained  in  their  endorsed 
text  books,  and  that  notwithstanding  this  knowledge 

52 


Tart  Observations. 

on  their  part  of  the  untruthfulness  of  the  statements 
they  have  continued  to  endorse  and  support  them. 

Their  course  in  these  matters  is  frequently  excused 
in  view  of  the  good  intentions  with  which  they  are 
credited.  I  must  be  permitted  to  question  the  good 
intentions  on  the  part  of  persons  who  deliberately  and 
knowingly  vitiate  the  minds  of  the  growing  generation 
by  the  instillation  of  known  falsehoods. 

Some  Tart  Observations  on  this  "Fake"  Scientific 
Teaching. 

While  on  this  subject,  and  not  with  any  idea  of 
bringing  out  anything  new,  but  simply  for  the  purpose 
of  calling  to  mind  some  of  the  features  of  this  dis- 
reputable business,  it  might  be  well  to  refer  to  that 
part  of  the  report  of  the  Committee  of  Fifty  on  "The 
Physiological  Aspects  of  the  Liquor  Problem"  which 
deals  with  instruction  on  the  physiological  action  of 
alcohol.  It  is  characteristic,  perhaps,  that,  with  one 
single  exception,  there  has  not  been  found  any  physiol- 
ogist or  physician,  even  among  the  most  radical  ad- 
vocates of  total  abstinence,  in  Europe,  that  has  ever 
unreservedly  endorsed  the  educational  methods  adopted 
in  America.  Even  Forel,  the  most  rabid  and  fanatical, 
says:  "I  think  that  in  America  somewhat  unwise 
methods  have  been  adopted." 

Dr.  H.  P.  Bowditch,  of  the  Harvard  Medical  School, 
and  Dr.  C.  F.  Hodge,  of  Clarke  University,  who  wrote 
this  part  of  the  report,  have  something  to  say  of  the 
methods  and  motives  of  the  "department  of  scientific 
temperance  instruction."  Information  as  to  the 
method  of  approving  and  endorsing  these  text  books 
was,  upon  request,  not  given.  The  two  doctors  also 
said  that  this  idea  of  text  book  instruction  "has  had 
behind  it  the  powerful  influence  of  the  text  book  pub- 
lishing firms  throughout  the  country."  They  quote 

S3 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

from  one  of  the  publications  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  that 
it  is  the  object  to  teach  "only  physiology  enough  to 
make  the  hygiene  of  temperance  and  other  laws  of 
health  intelligible,"  and  that  temperance  should  be  the 
chief  topic  and  occupy  at  least  one-fourth  the  space  in 
the  text  books.  The  report  further  says :  "the  tempta- 
tion has  been  irresistible  to  either  manufacture  evidence 
or  stretch  it  over  points  that  it  does  not  cover/7  The 
two  doctors  intimate  very  broadly  that  the  persons 
who  are  referred  to  as  authority  by  the  "department 
of  scientific  temperance  instruction"  are  not  recognized 
by  men  of  science  as  authority  on  this  question.  They 
note  a  remarkable  "disadjustment  between  this  public 
school  education  and  that  in  our  colleges,  universities 
and  medical  schools."  Also  that  "an  attempt  is  being 
deliberately  made  to  deceive  them  (the  children)  for 
a  special,  supposedly  moral,  purpose."  Another  quota- 
tion, which  is  somewhat  vigorous,  reads  as  follows : 
"The  books,  especially  those  intended  for  the  lower 
grades,  fairly  bristle  with  statements  of  a  character 
to  work  upon  the  fears  of  the  reader,  and  remind  one 
in  this  respect  of  patent  medicine  advertisements." 

It  is  well  known  that  such  statements  as  are  required 
in  these  school  physiologies  in  order  to  be  approved 
and  endorsed  by  the  W.  C.  T.  U.,  are  statements 
which  no  scientific  man  who  is  honest  with  himself 
and  has  any  regard  for  his  reputation,  could  possibly 
write.  The  only  case  quoted,  of  a  professional  physiol- 
ogist of  standing  who  wrote  one  of  these  text  books, 
shows  clearly  that  this  man  in  his  text  book  for  the 
schools  flatly  contradicts  a  text  book  which  he  wrote 
for  medical  students,  and  that  his  statement  in  the 
school  physiology  is  a  disingenuous  evasion  of  the  real 
question  and,  so  far  as  its  necessary  effect  upon  the 
mind  of  the  child  is  concerned,  a  deliberate  misrep- 
resentation. 

54 


Moral  Stand  of  the  Brewers. 

It  would  be  easy  to  go  on  quoting  things  of  this 
ind,  to  show  how  the  fanatics  have  deliberately  mis- 
epresented  certain  leading  physiologists,  as  Dr.  Chit- 
enden,  of  Yale,  and  Dr.  Hodge,  of  Clarke,  and  also 
o  go  into  the  statements  made  by  school  teachers  as 
o  the  utter  futility  and,  in  fact,  pernicious  character 
f  this  sort  of  misinstruction.  However,  the  above  quo- 
ations  are  sufficient  for  the  present  purpose.  The  con- 
clusion of  the  writers  of  the  report  for  the  Committee 
of  Fifty  is  summed  up  in  the  sentence:  "It  is  thus 
ipparent  that  under  the  name  of  scientific  temperance 
nstruction  there  has  been  grafted  upon  the  public 
school  system  of  nearly  all  our  states  an  educational 
scheme  relating  to  alcohol  which  is  neither  scientific 
nor  temperate  nor  instructive/'  as  Voltaire  said  in  his 
day  that  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  finally  ceased  to  be 
either  holy,  or  Roman,  or  an  empire. 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

county   to   take   every   precaution   to   so  conduct   their   busi- 
ness as  to  leave  no  ground  for  complaint. 

"We  believe  that  if  the  saloon  keepers  themselves  will  take 
steps  to  correct  the  abuses  upon  which  most  of  the  com- 
plaints have  been  founded,  that  complaints  will  cease,  the 
public  agitation  be  quieted  and  the  saloon  keepers  left  alone 
to  pursue  their  business  undisturbed  by  the  agitations  spread- 
ing over  the  state.  To  this  end  we  seriously  urge: 

"i.  That  all  saloon  keepers  take  extra  pains  and  precau- 
tions to  conduct  their  business  in  a  quiet  and  orderly  man- 
ner and  to  allow  no  disturbance  within,  or  congregating 
without  their  places. 

"2.  That  they  keep  their  places  darkened  on  Sundays, 
with  blinds  down  and  front  doors  closed;  that  bowling  al- 
leys, pool  tables  and  other  games  of  amusement  be  suspended 
on  that  day;  that  the  operation  of  phonographs  and  the 
playing  of  all  musical  instruments  be  suspended,  that  no 
congregating  on  sidewalks  or  about  saloons,  sitting  on  water 
.  troughs,  chairs  or  benches  in  front  of  or  about  saloons  be 
permitted ;  that  all  blinds  be  so  drawn  as  to  prevent  light 
within  from  being  seen  from  without;  that  loud  conversa- 
tion or  boisterous  conduct  be  prevented,  and  that  everything 
be  done  to  convince  the  authorities  and  the  public  in  gen- 
eral that  the  law  is  being  practically  complied  with. 

"Unless  the  foregoing  directions  are  followed  by  the  sa- 
loon keepers  of  this  city  and  county,  we  are  firmly  convinced 
that  the  Sunday  closing  law  will  be  enforced.  We  hope  you 
will  follow  the  warning  we  herein  give." 

This  letter  was  accompanied  by  a  personal  note 
emphasizing  that  the  letter  is  not  a  mere  matter  of 
form  but  means  what  it  says,  and  intimating  that  the 
brewers  fully  intend  to  enforce  it  by  employing  such 
means  as  may  be  at  their  disposal,  as  withholding  sup- 
plies of  beer,  etc. 

This  action  is  to  be  commended.  It  shows  that 
sounder  views  are  gradually  spreading  among  the 
brewers  and  that  the  old  policies  are  beginning  to  be 
left  behind.  Competition  run  mad  is  at  the  bottom  of 
some  of  the  glaring  evils  that  attach  to  the  retail  busi- 

56 


Causes  of  Brewers'  Reform. 

ness.  Competition  properly  restrained  and  regulated 
will  have  to  take  its  place.  , 

It  is  charged  by  the  enemies  of  the  trade  that  the 
brewers  are  taking  such  steps  as  these  not  from  any 
ligh  moral  motive  but  merely  from  considerations  of 
gain,  to  escape  unfavorable  legislation,  to  prevent  the 
enforcement  of  obnoxious  laws,  or  to  pacify  public 
opinion  against  the  saloon  business.  This  objection  is 
frequently  heard,  and  it  is  stated  that  the  brewers  did 
not  act  until  they  felt  the  knife  at  their  throats,  and 
that  such  death-bed  repentance  does  not  count  for 
Imuch. 

The  point  is  well  worth  discussing.  No  doubt  there 
is  some  truth  in  the  reflection  that  if  the  brewers  had 
called  a  halt  earlier,  and  before  certain  evil  excres- 
cences of  the  saloon  business  had  reached  a  degree  of 
flagrant  offensiveness,  the  moral  affect  of  their  action 
would  have  been  greater.  But  such  action  would  hardly 
be  in  consonance  with  the  usual  course  of  reform  in 
matters  of  business.  Nor  have  we  far  to  go  in  search 
of  analogies.  Who  thought  of  reform  in  the  manage- 
ment of  the  life  insurance  business  until  the  actions  of 
the  managers  of  these  great  corporations  became  so 
foul  that  the  stench  of  them  reached  the  heavens  and 
floated  over  the  land?  Who  suggested  reform  in  the 
meat  packing  business,  until  those  in  charge  allowed 
it  to  become  so  rotten  that  when  the  lid  was  taken  off 
it  turned  the  stomachs  of  the  people,  both  physically 
and  morally?  Who  proposed  a  curb  on  the  rapacity 
of  the  predatory  corporations  of  the  type  popularly 
and  vaguely  described  as  trusts,  until  their  practices 
became  intolerable  ?  And  if  they  reformed  without  ex- 
ternal compulsion,  was  it  from  an  awakening  of  moral 
consciousness  or  rather  from  considerations  of  business 
policy  ? 

57 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

So,  I  say,  while  the  brewers  might  have  made  them- 
selves moral  heroes  by  starting  reforms  before  busi- 
ness considerations  compelled  them,  it  was  hardly  in 
human  nature  to  expect  such  an  exhibition  of  moral 
sensitiveness  and  courage.  They  have  been,  in  that  re- 
spect, no  better  and  no  worse  than  most  of  our  busi- 
nessmen. 

And  yet,  it  seems  to  me,  they  are  better  than  the 
majority  of  businessmen.  It  has  occurred  to  me  that 
the  course  of  action  which  the  brewers  are  pursuing 
with  respect  to  driving  out  disorderly  saloons  and 
compelling  their  customers  to  adhere  strictly  not  only 
to  the  law  of  the  land  but  to  the  unwritten  law  of 
respectability,  is  something  that  few,  if  any,  other  busi- 
nessmen would  have  the  moral  sensitiveness  and 
stamina  to  undertake. 

The  brewer  is  in  business  to  make  money,  like  other 
businessmen.  When  he  has  sold  his  goods  his  con- 
nection with  them  ends.  He  surely  cannot,  equitably 
or  morally,  be  held  accountable  for  what  the  purchaser 
may  do  with  the  goods.  If  I  were  to  go  to  a  dry 
goods  house  in  Chicago  today  and  say  to  the  manager : 
"You  are  selling  goods  to  Mrs.  Jones.  Do  you  know 
that  siie  makes  dresses  for  the  women  of  the  half- 
world?  You  ought  to  stop  selling  her  any  more 
goods ! "  how  would  I  be  received  ?  If  the  manager 
was  a  good-natured  man  he  would  laugh;  if  he  was 
grouchy,  he  would  ask  me  to  shut  the  door  from  the 
other  side.  Yet  that  is  what  the  brewer  is  doing.  He 
follows  his  goods  after  they  have  reached  the  pur- 
chaser, and  he  assumes  to  control  the  purchaser's  use 
of  them.  Surely,  he  is  going  far  beyond  what  any  other 
businessman  would  consider  his  duty. 

So,  the  brewer  is  in  reality  assuming  a  moral  re- 
sponsibility far  beyond  his  business  or  legal  responsibil- 

58 


Temperance  the  Supreme  Virtue. 


ity,  far  beyond  what  any  other  businessmen  would  do. 
Of  course,  if  he  is  himself,  nominally  or  actually,  the 
owner  of  the  retail  stand,  it  is  no  more  than  proper  that 
he  should  extend  his  influence  to  the  control  of  the  re- 
tail sale  and  the  conduct  of  the  stand.  But  he  goes 
farther.  He  seeks  to  keep  in  check  those  saloonkeepers 
who  are  under  his  legal  control,  cutting  down  his  own 
sales  and  reducing  his  income. 

This,  it  seems  to  me,  involves  a  degree  of  moral 
courage  which  is  unapproached  in  the  business  world 
I  anywhere. 

Now,  I  do  not  want  any  brewer  to  take  this  as  a 
hint  to  drop  this  method  of  purifying  the  retail  trade. 
Quite  the  contrary!  I  want  to  pat  him  on  the  back 
and  compliment  him  on  his  course.  Keep  on,  weed 
out  the  disorderly  places,  use  all  your  means  to  compel 
your  customers  to  comply  with  the  law  and  to  give 
no  offense  to  the  public.  A  good  beginning  has  been 
made.  Let  the  work  spread  all  over  the  country  until 
the  improper  drnking  place  is  become  a  thing  of  the 
past. 

(September,   1906.) 

The   Supreme   Virtue   is  Temperance. 

It  were  time  the  brewers  began  to  understand  more 
clearly  and  generally  the  advisability  of  "getting  to 
the  people/'  and  seeking  to  promote  that  general  ten- 
dency towards  intelligent,  wholesome  living,  which  is 
characteristic  of  our  age  and  is  chiefly  lacking  in  one 
particular,  viz.,  in  understanding  that,  far  and  away 
above  all  question  of  quality  and  chemical  constitution 
of  food  and  drink,  there  is  the  overshadowing  im- 
portance of  the  supreme  virtue  of  all — temperance.  It 
matters  comparatively  little  what  we  eat.  The  main 
point  is  how  we  eat,  and  here  the  main  point  again 
is  moderate  quantity. 

59 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

Some  time  ago  one  of  the  anti-alcoholist  papers  de- 
nounced my  "Talks  on  Beer  and  Temperance"  and 
my  insistence  upon  the  manner  of  eating,  thorough 
mastication,  comfort  and  enjoyment  about  a  meal,  as 
essential  to  health,  and  the  failure  to  observe  these 
points  with  the  consequent  digestive  and  nervous 
troubles  as  a  far  more  prolific  source  of  crime,  poverty, 
insanity  and  domestic  infelicity,  than  is  drink,  by  call- 
ing these  utterances  pleasantries  intended  to  divert 
people  from  the  issue  of  anti-alcoholism. 

Here  are  two  items  from  daily  papers  that  bear  some- 
what in  the  same  direction  as  my  remarks.    One  pap 
says: 

Bad  cooking  was  held  responsible  for  much  of  the  drunk- 
enness in  the  country,  and  wives  were  urged  to  attend  cook- 
ing schools  in  order  to  avoid  driving  their  husbands  to  drink 
by  their  culinary  experiments,  in  an  address  by  Dr.  J.  J. 
McLaughlin,  of  Chicago,  before  the  annual  convention  of  the 
Catholic  Total  Abstinence  Union  of  Illinois. 

"I  believe  that  bad  cooking  brings  to  men  the  desire  for 
alcohol  and  other  stimulants  when  otherwise  they  would 
not  feel  the  craving  for  them,"  said  Dr.  McLaughlin.  'Many 
a  man  has  been  driven  to  drink  by  the  doughy  bread  and 
soggy  backwheat  cakes  set  before  him  daily  by  his  better 
half.'  Recently  a  movement  has  been  started  to  establish 
popular  cooking  schools.  Let  us  further  the  movement  by 
getting  the  women  interested,  for  it  is  certain  they  will  be 
popular  with  the  men.  Many  a  crime  has  been  committed 
by  the  victim  of  cold  coffee  and  burned  beefsteak." 

This  is  from  the  Chicago  Record-Herald: 

"No  girl  should  marry  a  man  with  the  quick  lunch  habit, 
for  their  life  is  sure  to  be  unhappy. 

"The  barbarism  of  a  South  Sea  islander  can't  be  com- 
pared with  the  hurry-up  idea  some  people  have  in  restau- 
rants." 

Secretary  E.  R.  Pritchard  of  the  city  health  department 
thus  observed  yesterday,  and  reached  his  conclusions  by  this 
system  of  deduction : 

"The  quick  lunch  habit  causes  indigestion,  indigestion  en- 
60 


Increased  Beer  Consumption. 

genders  ill  nature,  ill  nature  makes  a  man  miserable  and 
some  one  has  to  suffer  for  it,  then  he  scolds  his  wife. 

"I  am  not  talking  about  the  food  that  is  served,"  Mr.  Prit- 
chard  added.  "That  is  usually  good  and  clean.  But  it  is 
the  rush  and  the  haste  with  which  a  man  eats  a  quick  lunch 
that  does  the  business. 

"The  places  where  quick  lunches  are  served  are  responsi- 
ble for  more  divorces,  wrecked  homes,  and  domestic  trouble 
than  anything  else.  When  a  man  scolds  his  wife  and  finds 
fault  at  home  it  nearly  always  can  be  laid  to  the  door  of  the 
quick  lunch  restaurant. 

"We  think  we  are  civilized,  but  the  way  people  eat  at  the 
lunch  counters  is  worse  than  barbarous.  A  savage  wouldn't 
think  of  mistreating  himself  that  way.  A  man  rushes  into  a 
restaurant  at  noon.  He  sees  a  man  who  is  finishing  a  lunch, 
and  darts  behind  his  chair,  so  that  he  can  slide  into  a  seat. 
Then  he  mumbles  his  order,  pushes  the  food  into  his  mouth, 
and  swallows  it  as  if  he  were  trying  to  break  a  record.  It 
is  no  wonder  that  men  who  eat  at  quick  lunch  counters 
scold  their  wives." 

Perhaps  the  Catholic  Total  Abstinence  Union  and 
the  Chicago  Health  Department  are  also  in  this  con- 
spiracy to  create  a  diversion  from  the  question  of  anti- 
alcoholism  ! 

Increase    in    Beer    Consumption    Consistent    with 
Temperance  Sentiment,  says  Anti- 
Saloon  League. 

The  brewers  are  not  alone  in  the  belief  that  the 
increase  in  beer  consumption  implies  greater  temper- 
ance. Even  some  of  the  Mark  Tapleys  of  the  Anti- 
Saloon  League  agree  with  this  sentiment,  nolens  volens. 
Said  Supt.  Williamson  of  the  Anti-Saloon  League  in 
Cleveland,  according  to  the  Plain-Dealer: 

There  is  a  steady  decrease  in  the  consumption  of  spirit- 
uous liquors,  such  as  brandy,  whisky  and  wine,  and  a  tend- 
ency to  drink  more  malt  liquors,  such  as  beer.  The  decrease 
is  doubtless  as  marked  in  the  one  as  is  the  increase  in 
the  other. 

61 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

Then,  after  intimating  that  immigration  and  the 
increase  in  population  had  something  to  do  with  the 
matter,  he  said : 

"Never  before  has  temperance  sentiment  had  such  a  strong 
grip  on  the  people.  Saloons  by  dozens  are  going  out  of  bus- 
iness daily  in  various  parts  of  this  and  other  states.  Tem- 
perance legislation  is  being  passed  by  every  state,  and  every 
year  the  sentiment  that  the  liquor  traffic  must  be  curtailed 
or  banished  is  steadily  on  the  increase.  I  do*  not  think  that 
there  is  any  cause  for  worry  even  if  the  beer  consumption 
has  jumped  in  the  past  year." 

Hey,  diddle,  diddle,  the  cats  and  the  fiddle!  So, 
temperance  sentiment  never  before  has  had  such  a 
strong  grip  on  the  people,  and  hence  they  drank  5,200,- 
ooo  barrels  of  beer  more  than  the  year  before! 

That  from  the  Anti-Saloon  League!  What  more 
does  the  brewer  want  ? 

The  Milwaukee  Free  Press  quotes  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Henry  Colman,  trustee  of  the  Anti-Saloon  League, 
with  a  similar  statement,  in  connection  with  this  in- 
crease of  beer  consumption  that  "the  temperance  senti- 
ment is  increasing  all  the  time."  Here  the  immigrant 
and  the  wealthy  classes  are  made  to  consume  the 
additional  beer  while  "among  the  middle  and  laboring 
classes  however  the  temperance  sentiment  is  constantly 
growing."  Is  it  necessary  to  point  out  the  reverend 
gentleman's  fine  logic? 

In  the  light  of  the  past  year's  results  it  becomes  in- 
telligible why  the  Ohio  prohibitionists  are  so  violently 
denouncing  the  Anti-Saloon  League.  Well,  if  the 
prohibitionists  and  the  churches  cast  them  off,  perhaps 
the  brewers  might  hire  them  to  keep  on  agitating,  if 
they  will  undertake  to  make  it  another  five  million 
barrels  for  the  new  fiscal  year. 

For  the  benefit  of  anti-alcoholist  editors,  I  will  say 
here  plainly:  "This  is  a  joke."  Anti-alcoholist  writ- 
ing seems  to  dull  the  sense  of  humor.  I  have  had  anti- 

62 


Overfeeding  and  Drink. 

alcoholist  papers  take  some  of  my  stuff  and  treat  it 
seriously  when  the  satire  was  so  plain  that,  as  they 
used  to  say,  if  it  had  been  a  snake  it  would  have  bitten 

you. 

(October  i,  1906.) 

The   Use   of  Alcoholic   Drink  in  Connection  with 
Over-feeding. 

It  is  peculiar  to  notice  how  difficult  it  is  even  for 
supposedly  disinterested  inquirers  into  the  drink  ques- 
tion to  disencumber  themselves  completely  of  the  pre- 
vailing prejudice  and  to  approach  the  problem  with 
perfectly  open  minds.  The  Growler  believes  that  the 
gentlemen  who  made  the  investigations  for  the  so- 
called  Committee  of  Fifty  approached  the  subject  with 
an  honest  intention  to  discover  the  truth,  but  there  are 
numerous  instances  in  which  it  crops  out  plainly  that 
they  still  remain  to  a  certain  extent  under  the  in- 
fluence of  that  hostile  attitude  of  mind  which  has  been 
engendered  by  the  misrepresentations  of  the  anti-alco- 
holists. 

The  volume  on  the  Physiological  Aspects  of  the 
Liquor  Problem,  edited  by  Dr.  John  S.  Billings  and 
containing  investigations  by  and  under  the  direction 
of  such  eminent  scientists  as  W.  O.  Atwater,  H.  P. 
Bowditch,  R.  H.  Chittenden  and  W.  H.  Welch,  con- 
tains a  lengthy  contribution  on  the  Pharmalogical  Ac- 
tion of  Ethyl  Alcohol  by  Dr.  John  J.  Abel. 

A  chapter  referring  to  "the  action  of  alcohol  on 
muscular  activity/'  states  the  problem  in  the  following 
terms : 

In  considering  the  relation  of  alcohol  to  physical  labor  a 
number  of  questions  present  themselves  for  solution. 

Does  it  enable  an  individual  whose  food  supply  is  suffi- 
cient for  his  needs  to  do  more  work?  Does  it  enable  the 
tired  person  to  put  forth  new  exertions?  And  if  so>,  is  it 
superior  in  this  respect  to  tea,  sugar,  or  other  easily  assim- 

63 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

liable  food  products?  Does  the  fact  that  alcohol  is  oxidized 
in  the  body,  and  that  it  therefore  yields  energy,  make  it  a 
practicable  food  and  store  of  energy  for  the  muscles?  Or  is 
its  utilization  in  this  particular  annulled  by  its  psychic  action, 
by  its  action  in  dilating  the  blood  vessels  of  the  body  sur- 
face, etc.? 

>f  If  Dr.  Abel  were  going  to  investigate  the  value  of 
eefsteak  as  a  food,  would  he  take  a  person  and  give 
him  his  full  quota  of  other  food  and  then  make  him 
eat  a  quantity  of  beefsteak  on  top  of  it,  in  order  to 
discover  how  that  beefsteak  would  affect  the  subject? 
Would  it  not  be  a  foregone  conclusion  that  in  that 
case  there  would  be  an  excess  of  food  taken  into  the 
system,  and  that  that  fact  alone  would  be  bound  to  I 
produce  injurious  effects  which  in  that  case  would 
probably  be  ascribed  to  the  beefsteak  although  as  a  mat- 
ter of  fact  the  beefsteak  as  such  had  nothing  to  do  with 
it,  but  the  trouble  was  due  merely  to  the  excessive 
quantity  of  food. 

How,  then,  is  it  possible  to  arrive  at  results  of  any 
value  in  regard  to  the  action  of  alcohol  if  the  inquiry 
is  started  with  this  question  "Does  it  enable  an  in- 
dividual whose  food  supply  is  sufficient  for  his  needs 
to  do  more  work?" 

Any  physiologist  would  answer  in  advance  that  it 
would  not,  that,  on  the  contrary,  it  would  reduce  the 
individual  capacity  for  work.  Not,  however,  because 
it  is  alcohol,  but  simply  because  it  is  given  on  top 
of  a  sufficient  food  supply,  and  therefore  creates  an 
excessive  supply  of  food  which  would  constitute  an 
improper  burden  upon  the  system.  This  reminds  me 
of  some  remarks  made  by  Dr.  A.  J.  Starke  in  Die 
Berechtigung  des  Alcoholgemisses.  He  says: 

A    man   who    "lives    well"    generally,    although    he 

might  not  have  been  a  drinking  man,  nevertheless,  in  addi- 
tion to  all  other  things — which  should  not  be  forgotten — al- 
so indulges  in  good  alcoholic  beverages. 

64 


Myths  about  Sunday  Closing. 

I  will  go  further.  I  do  not  deny  that  in  the  ailments  of 
those  who  for  years  have  "lived  well,"  the  alcoholic  bev- 
erages play  a  certain  part. 

And  yet  the  connection  is  quite  different  from  the  case  of 
the  drunkard.     It  is  not  a  case  of  any  "specific  action"  of 
the  alcoholic  beverage,  but  it  is  merely  a"  question  of  overT 
feeding,    and    for    those    ailments    every    substance,    that    ; 
taken   and   which  contains  nourishment  is  to  blame,   inc 
ing  the  alcoholic  beverages  in  so  far  as  they  contain  nov 
ishment. 

The  alcoholic  beverages  all  contain  nourishment  for  the 
reason  alone  that  they  contain  alcohol  which  is  a  nutritive 

substance And    just    because    alcoholic    beverages 

are  not  merely  relishes,  but  also  foods — beer  being  quite  a 
substantial  food — they  will,  like  all  nutritive  matter  without 
exception,  contribute  to  over-feeding  where  such  takes  place 
in  view  of  the  whole  mode  of  living  of  the  individual. 

A  necessary  consequence  of  these  facts  is,  not  that 

these  beverages  should  be  avoided,  but  that  their  nutritive 
strength  should  be  taken  into  account  and  allowed  for  in  the 
d?.ily  ration  of  food.  If  a  man  drinks  a  certain  amount  of 
beer  a  day  he  should  diminish  the  quantity  of  other  foods 

accordingly In   that   way   the   total    daily   quantity   of 

nutritive  matter  can  be  kept  within  the  limits  necessary  for 
health. 

He  who  likes  a  glass  of  wine,  beer,  or  cordial,  need  not 
worry  on  that  account,  but  he  should  allow  for  the  nutritive 
value  of  these  beverages,  just  as  in  a  course  dinner  we  should 
not  satisfy  our  hunger  with  the  first  course,  but  allow  for 
the  nutritive  matter  to  be  supplied  by  the  following  courses. 

Diminution  of  Crime  by  Sunday  Closing  a  Myth. 

The  Missouri  State  Republican  says  that  official  statistics 
from  the  state  auditor  of  Missouri  show  that  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  Sunday  closing  law  did  not  reduce  crime  in 
the  largest  saloon  center  of  the  state — St.  Louis,  under  di- 
rect supervision  of  the  Folk  police  board.  The  following  is 
the  official 'record,  according  to  State  Auditor  Wilder:  Crim- 
inal costs,  St.  Louis  city,  for  1904,  $40,015.25;  for  1905,  $59,- 
695.10. 

The  year  1904  was  world's  fair  year,  when  the  population 
was  away  above  normal  in  St.  Louis  and  when  crime  natur- 
ally was  more  than  normal,  so  that  when  crime  in  1905  ex- 

65 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

ceeded  that  of  the  world's  fair  year,  it  broke  all  records. 
The  "lid"  was  not  on  in  1904;  it  was  on  in  1905.  As  is  well 
known,  St.  Louis  has  more  than  one-half  of  all  the  saloons 
of  the  state.  A  glance  at  the  crime  record  of  1904  and  1905 
for  St.  Louis,  before  and  after  the  Sunday  law  was  enforced, 
does  not  prove  the  truth  of  Governor  Folk's  assertion  that 
"prohibition"  on  Sunday  decreases  crime.  Crime  has  in- 
creased, under  the  "lid*'  policy,  or  the  official  state  record 
lies. — Kansas  City,  Mo.,  Journal. 

This  brings  to  mind  some  of  the  testimony  which 
was  given  by  Mrs.  Fernande  Richter,  of  St.  Louis, 
last  session  before  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  of 
the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  59th  Congress 
during  the  hearing  on  the  so  called  Hepburn  bill  which 
aimed  to  place  liquor  in  interstate  commerce  under 
the  jurisdiction  of  a  state  as  soon  as  it  entered  that 
state  and  before  delivery  to  the  consignee. 

In  the  course  of  the  address  to  the  Committee,  Mrs. 
Richter  said  in  regard  to  conditions  in  St.  Louis : 

It  has  been  represented  that  a  convenient  or  subservient 
police  record  showed  that  crimes  were  lessened  through  the 
enforcement  of  the  Sunday  law.  They  indicated  a  smaller 
Monday  docket,  but  they  did  not  explain  why  the  docket 
on  Tuesdays  was  so  much  larger.  And  the  statistics  of  our 
hospitals  show  an  increase  of  .cases  of  alcoholism  by  100  per 
cent  and  more.  People  will  get  a  bottle  of  whisky  more  eas- 
ily than  a  can  of  beer.  Yet  this  is  only  the  result  of  the 
closed  Sunday.  We  see  the  glaring  effects  of  prohibition  in 
the  conditions  that  prevail  in  the  prohibition  States  and  in 
the  disgusting  results  that  followed  the  abolition  of  the  can- 
teen. 

After  Mrs.  Richter  got  through  the  following 
dialogue  ensued: 

Mr.  Alexander : — Madam,  you  spoke  of  the  police  court 
calendar  being  larger  on  Tuesday  morning  than  on  Monday 
morning,  now  that  the  Sunday-closing  law  in  St.  Louis  is 
enforced  ? 

Mrs.  Richter: — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.   Alexander  : — Why  is  that  ? 

Mrs.  Richter: — They  are  held  for  the  chief  on  Mondays 
66 


Unfair  Treatment. 

and  put  on  the  outside  docket,  so  that  they  lessen  the  Mon- 
day docket,  and  they  can  say:  "Oh  the  Monday  docket!  We 
do  not  have  so  many  prisoners  on  Sunday." 

Mr.  Alexander: — Then  it  is  a  trick? 

Mrs.  Richter: — Yes,  sir,  it  is  a  plain  trick  .(Laughter.) 

Thus  another  of  the  soap  bubbles  with  which  the 
anti-alcoholist  seeks  to  entertain  the  people,  has  burst, 
and  the  arguments  that  have  been  based  upon  the 
alleged  diminution  of  crime  in  consequence  of  the 
Sunday  closing  of  saloons  must  go  for  naught. 

(December  i,  1906.) 

Incapacity  to  Approach  the  Question  of  Alcoholic 
Drink  Fairly. 

The  brewers  of  Peoria,  111.,  are  supporting  a  move- 
ment to  limit  the  number  of  saloons  in  that  city  to  one 
for  every  500  of  population.  A  writer  in  the  Peoria 
Journal  says  on  this  subject: 

I  am  under  the  impression  that  there  is  something  of  an 
African  nature  in  that  proposed  ordinance  for  limiting  the 
number  of  saloons.  I  believe  that  they  should  be  limited,  but 
when  I  see  the  move  coming  from  the  particular  direction 
that  it  does,  the  old  saying  in  regard  to  distrusting  Greeks, 
who  bear  gifts  comes  to  my  mind.  If  it  had  been  proposed 
by  someone  who  was  an  enemy  to  saloons,  I  should  have 
thought  it  was  all  right,  but  when  it  is  championed  by  the 
brewers,  who  are  animated  by  an  honest  desire  to  sell  as 
much  beer  as  possible — well,  it  looks  queer  to  say  the  least. 

One  of  the  most  striking  illustrations  of  the  utter 
incapacity  of  the  average  man  to  deal  with  the  question 
of  alcoholic  drink  in  a  rational  manner  is  this  preju- 
dice which  makes  him  take  everything  for  granted 
against  the  liquor  traffic. 

According  to  the  reasoning  of  the  Peoria  Journal 
man,  if  you  want  a  job  of  carpentering  done  you  should 
avoid  the  carpenter  and  go  to  a  tailor,  and  if  you 
want  medical  advice  you  ought  to  shun  the  physician 

67 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

and  go  to  a  hod-carrier.  It  is  true,  the  carpenter  might 
know  more  about  carpentering  than  the  tailor,  and 
the  physician  might  know  more  about  medicine  than 
the  hod-carrier.  But  they  must  not  be  trusted.  They 
make  their  living  out  of  their  vocations  and  therefore 
cannot  be  trusted  to  exercise  them  in  the  interest  of 
their  patrons  or  clients. 

If  a  move  to  regulate  medical. practitioners  was  pro- 
posed by  people  who  believe  in  faith  cure,  our  Peoria 
Journal  man  would  have  confidence  in  the  move  be- 
cause the  faith  cure  people  are  enemies  of  the  phy- 
sicians, but  if  it  emanated  from  the  medical  profession, 
it  must  be  condemned.  If  the  structural  iron  mills 
proposed  to  restrict  the  carpentering  trade  it  would 
be  a  very  engaging  proposition,  for  the  structural  iron 
men  are  opposed  to  the  carpenter  who  works  in  wood. 
But  if  the  carpenters  should  propose  regulation  of  their 
own  trade — beware !  There  is  an  "African"  in  the 
woodpile ! 

In  other  words,  this  man  fully  indorses  the  policy 
which  has  been  the  curse  of  liquor  legislation  in  this 
country,  viz.,  to  put  it  in  the  hands  of  enemies,  who 
are  prejudiced  against  alcoholic  drink,  and  legislators 
who  are  ignorant  of  the  drink  question. 

While  such  an  insane  policy  lasts,  it  is  of  course,  im- 
possible to  arrive  at  any  rational  settlement  of  this 
troublesome  matter.  If  people  would  handle  the  ques- 
tion as  other  questions  are  handled,  i.  e.,  investigate 
first  and  with  open  minds,  and  judge  afterwards,  in- 
stead of  judging  first  and  hunting  for  justification 
of  their  judgments  afterwards,  there  would  be  hope 
of  sane  legislation. 

Not  that  the  Growler  cares  much  what  the  Peoria 
Journal  thinks.  He  refers  to  the  matter  here  as  being 
symptomatic  of  the  attitude  of  mind  of  the  general 

public. 

68 


False  Moral  Atmosphere. 

The    False    Moral    Atmosphere    that    Befogs    the 
Popular  Mind. 

And  this  brings  up  my  old  hobby.  The  great  dif- 
ficulty in  dealing  with  this  drink  question  is  the  false, 
artificial  moral  atmosphere,  which  causes  the  average 
man  to  feel  that  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink  is  some- 
thing not  altogether  proper  and  commendable,  but 
rather  in  the  nature  of  an  indulgence  of  the  flesh 
which  is  not  consistent  with  the  highest  moral  stand- 
ards. 

This  false  moral  atmosphere  which  befogs  the  aver- 
age mind  is  the  foundation  of  the  incapacity  of  most 
men  to  approach  the  drink  question  in  a  spirit  of  fair- 
ness, and  it  is  at  this  point,  therefore,  that  those  who 
understand  the  question  should  begin  work. 

My  own  case  may  furnish  an  illustration.  After 
becoming  connected  with  this  publication,  I  naturally 
studied  the  alcohol  question.  If  I  talk  with  any  one 
about  it,  unless  he  knows  me  very  well  and  therefore 
knows  that  business  considerations  do  not  influence  my 
opinions  in  matters  of  science,  he  will  naturally  dis- 
count my  views  by  thinking :  "Oh,  well,  it's  his  busi- 
ness." But  if  an  anti-alcoholist  talks  to  him,  he  is 
under  the  impression  that  he  is  listening  to  a  disin- 
terested person  who  is  working  for  the  common  good 
as  a  matter  of  principle  and  on  high  moral  ground. 

This,  I  say,  is  the  impression  the  average  man  gets, 
and  that  is  one  reason  why  the  anti-alcoholist  can  make 
his  dreams  carry  the  way  he  does.  And  yet,  every 
student  of  the  question  knows  perfectly  well  that  the 
anti-alcoholist  side  of  the  matter  consists  of  gross 
exaggerations,  one-sided  observations,  and  unfortunate- 
ly a  not  too  scant  sprinkling  of — well,  what  did  the 
eminent  physiologists  call  it? — Oh,  yes,  of  yielding  to 
the  temptation  to  either  manufacture  evidence  or 

69 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

stretch  it  over  points  that  it  does  not  cover.  There  is 
a  good,  simple,  plain  and  strong  word  of  three  letters 
that  answers  this  description. 

The  Anti-Alcoholist  is  a  Defective. 

However,  it  should  be  impressed  upon  the  people 
that  the  assumed  moral  superiority  of  the  anti-alco- 
holist  is  a  myth.  His  garment  of  pretended  sanctity 
should  be  rent  and  the  naked  weakness  of  the  fanatic 
exposed.  I  have  no  quarrel  with  the  person  who 
simply  chooses  not  to  drink  alcoholic  beverages.  It 
may  be,  and  no  doubt  very  frequently  is,  the  case  that 
he  makes  a  great  mistake,  that  a  little  alcoholic  drink 
would  be  a  decided  benefit  to  him,  especially  where  tea 
and  coffee  are  largely  used.  But  there  are  people  who 
are  very  sensitive  to  alcoholic  influences,  without  being 
defectives  outright.  They  had  best  leave  alcohol  alone. 

There  are  also  those  who  cannot  take  it  in  modera- 
tion. They  had  better  leave  it  alone,  although  here 
it  is  better  to  try  to  induce  them  to  live  temperately 
in  other  respects.  The  person  who  is  intemperate  in 
the  use  of  alcohol  is  generally  intemperate  in  other 
things.  Make  him,  if  you  can,  eat  temperately  and 
rationally,  and  temperance  in  drink  will  in  most  cases, 
follow  naturally. 

Still,  all  this  is  a  little  aside  from  the  present  ques- 
tion. The  person  who  should  be  exposed  is  the  one 
who  is  not  satisfied  to  bear  his  own  misfortune,  his 
own  defective  or  inferior  nature  which  places  him 
without  the  ranks  of  normal  men  who  can  eat  and 
drink  what  they  like  in  moderation  and  be  healthy  and 
enjoy  living  without  fear  of  excess  and  consequent 
injury  to  themselves.  People  should  understand  that, 
far  from  indicating  a  superior  moral  status,  the  aver- 
sion to  alcohol  is  a  symptom  of  physical,  moral  or 
mental  defectiveness,  an  inferior,  sub-normal  nature, 

70 


Inferiority  of  the  "Antis." 

not  so  far  out  of  the  normal  as  to  be  classed  as  decid- 
edly diseased,  or  degenerate,  but  nevertheless  far 
enough  out  of  the  road  of  health  to  be  called  morbid. 
One  of  those  who  wrote  to  the  scientists  who  did  the 
work  for  the  Committee  of  Fifty  writes :  "Abstinence 
from  fear  of  excess,  argues  a  defective  moral  power 
which  should  be  educated,  or  else  of  bodily  disease; 
abstinence  from  lack  of  enjoyment,  shows  defective 
development  of  capacity  to  enjoy."  The  cowardly 
way  of  the  ascetic,  who  fled  to  the  wilderness  because 
he  was  too  weak  to  live  temperately  among  his  fellows, 
was  wont  to  give  him  the  odor  of  sanctity.  In  an  en- 
lightened age  such  a  view  is  only  a  survival  from  a 
lower  culture  which  should  be  put  away  in  a  museum 
of  psychological  archaeology,  as  showing  an  interest- 
ing phase  through  which  the  human  mind  had  to  pass 
before  emerging  into  the  light  of  the  present  culture. 

The  militant  anti-alcoholist  is  he  who  is  not  satis- 
fied to  bear  his  own  burden  of  physical  or  mental  de- 
fectiveness  or  inferiority,  but  must  needs  insist  that 
normal,  healthy  beings  shall  accommodate  themselves 
to  his  standard.  This  is  a  demand  that  a  healthy  na- 
ture will  turn  away  mildly,  and  with  a  feeling  of  pity 
for  the  poor  fellow  who  makes  it,  but  if  repeated  and 
insisted  upon,  he  will  spurn  it  with  contempt. 

Such  arguments  as  that  of  the  Peoria  Journal  writer 
would  be  impossible  if  a  wholesome  moral  atmosphere 
prevailed  instead  of  the  mists  of  misinformation  and 
unfounded  prejudice  that  overhang  this  question.  To 
disperse  this  mist  by  sound  teaching  as  to  wholesome 
living,  and  relegating  the  alcohol  question  to  a  place 
commensurate  with  its  comparative  insignificance  by 
the  side  of  other  branches  of  this  all  important  sub- 
ject, must  be  the  primary  object  of  those  upon  whom, 
owing  to  their  trade  interests,  naturally  falls  the  burden 
of  carrying  on  this  campaign. 

71 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much" 

(February,   1907.) 

The  "Fake"  Local  Option  Bill  of  the  Anti-Saloon 
League. 

The  crop  of  bills  dealing  with  the  liquor  question 
seems  to  be  uncommonly  big  the  present  legislative 
season.  From  all  the  States  bills  are  reported  by  the 
score.  If  all  these  bills  were  to  be  read  and  considered, 
there  would  be  no  time  for  anything  else.  It  is  not 
likely  that  many  will  be  seriously  considered,  as  the 
majority  are  the  product  of  ignorant  and  frequently 
fanatical  minds  wholly  incapable  of  grasping  the  fund- 
amentals of  this  complicated  matter.  But  even  so, 
there  will  be  enough  left  to  give  the  respective  com- 
mittees of  the  legislatures  plenty  of  work. 

So-called  local  option  bills  are  to  the  fore  every- 
where. In  most  cases  they  represent  the  efforts  of  the 
Anti-Saloon  League  and  are  gotten  up  with  the  in- 
sincerity characteristic  of  the  productions  of  that  or- 
ganization. The  bill  introduced  in  Illinois  is  a  sample. 
It  masquerades  under  the  captivating  title  of  a  local 
option  bill. 

Local  option  in  its  proper  sense  is  something  that 
is  near  to  the  American  heart.  It  is,  properly  speak- 
ing, nothing  more  than  local  self-government,  and  as 
such  appeals  strongly  to  the  mind  of  the  average  voter 
as  well  as  legislator.  A  genuine  local  option  bill 
would,  therefore,  have  little  opposition  on  the  part  of 
the  legislators  or  the  voters. 

But  the  bill  fathered  by  the  Anti-Saloon  League  is 
not  a  local  option  bill,  although  it  is  called  by  that 
name.  Under  that  name,  the  League  has  enlisted  the 
sympathies  of  many  well-meaning  people;  it  has  in- 
duced many  clergymen  to  advocate  the  bill  in  their 
pulpits,  it  is  arousing  its  followers  to  enthusiasm  and 
is  influencing  public  opinion  in  favor  of  the  bill  with 

72 


"Fake"  Local  Option. 

a  view  of  exerting  pressure  on  the  legislature.  But 
all  this  is  done  under  false  pretenses. 

The  bill  of  the  Anti-Saloon  League  provides  that  if 
a  county  votes  to  exclude  saloons,  this  vote  shall  be 
binding  on  every  division  of  the  county,  regardless  of 
the  sentiment  in  such  division.  If,  however,  the  coun- 
ty, as  a  whole,  votes  in  favor  of  saloons,  this  vote  is 
not  binding  on  the  entire  county  and  its  divisions,  but 
only  permits  such  divisions  as  have  shown  a  majority 
in  favor  of  saloons,  to  vote  again  on  the  question.  In 
other  words,  it  leaves  them  just  as  they  were  originally. 

Genuine  local  option  would  mean  that  if  the  voters 
vote  for  saloons  they  can  have  them,  and  if  they  vote 
against  them  they  shall  not  have  them. 

The  "fake"  local  option  bill  of  the  Anti-Saloon 
League,  however,  says  to  the  voter:  "You  can  vote 
as  you  like.  If  you  vote  our  way,  you  get  what  you 
vote  for.  If  you  do  not  vote  our  way,  you  get  noth- 
ing." 

That  is  the  jug-handled  proposition  of  the  Anti- 
Saloon  League.  It  is  a  deliberate  fraud  upon  the 
people. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  if  the  people  understand  the 
bill,  they  will  not  only  oppose  it,  but  will  resent  the 
attempt  of  an  organization  which  claims  to  work  for 
moral  advancement,  to  juggle  the  law  and  deceive  the 
voters  by  a  palpably  false  pretense. 

Clergymen  of  the  Fool  Type,  Women  with  Short 
Hair,  and  Men  with  Long  Hair. 

The  anti-alcoholists  have  been  greatly  shocked  by 
the  fact  that  President  Roosevelt  sent  a  message  of 
sympathy  to  Adolphus  Busch  when  the  latter  was  taken 
seriously  ill  a  short  time  ago.  Mr.  Roosevelt  and  Mr. 
Busch  are  personal  friends,  hence  the  message  was 

73 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

perfectly  natural.  But  the  "antis"  were  shocked,  never- 
theless. No  one  must  sympathize  with  a  brewer.  Even 
when  Mr.  Busch  donated  $100,000  to  the  San  Francisco 
sufferers,  the  rabid  "antis"  said  this  was  blood  money, 
tainted  with  the  destroyed  happiness  and  lives  of  thou- 
sands of  homes  and  individuals,  and  they  impugned  the 
motives  of  the  donor,  who  gave,  in  proportion  to  his 
wealth,  far  more  than  Mr.  Rockefeller. 

It  seems  to  the  Growler,  the  "antis"  ought  to  be 
used  to  Mr.  Roosevelt  by  this  time,  and  ought  no 
longer  to  be  shocked  by  anything  he  does  or  says. 
They  have  had  a  number  of  "jolts"  from  the  President. 
For  instance,  the  one  in  one  of  his  letters  to  Mr.  Bell- 
amy Storer  concerning  the  Archbishop  Ireland  inci- 
dent, where  Mr.  Roosevelt  wrote: 

"For  instance,  there  are  any  number  of  Methodist  clergy- 
men who  are  political  prohibitionists  and  support  the  third 
party  and  denounce  the  president  because  he  will  not  en- 
courage drunkenness  in  the  army  by  putting  down  the  can- 
teen. It  is  a  bad  thing  to  have  any  clergyman  of  this  fool 
type  promoted,  but  it  would  be  a  worse  thing  for  the  presi- 
dent to  try  to  interfere  with  his  promotion." 

The  Growler  has  discussed  the  canteen  question 
repeatedly,  but  he  never  used  quite  as  strong  language 
as  Mr.  Roosevelt.  "Clergymen  of  this  fool  type,"  is 
quite  up  to  Mr.  Roosevelt's  reputation  for  "strenu- 
osity."  That  is  his  opinion  of  the  clergymen  who 
fight  the  army  canteen  and  who  denounce  the  Presi- 
dent because  he  "will  not  encourage  drunkenness  in 
the  army  by  putting  down  the  canteen."  This  is  quite 
a  "pat"  expression,  too. 

Putting  down  the  canteen  means  encouraging  drunk- 
enness. 

It  is  well  known  that  such  is  the  opinion  of  official 
Washington  and  of  practically  every  army  officer. 

When,  oh  when,  will  Congress  summon  enough 
courage  to  act  upon  its  conviction? 

74 


Individual  Temperament. 

Will  it  continue  forever  to  be  influenced  by  the 
"women  with  short  hair  and  men  with  long  hair?" 
Dr.  Emil  G.  Hirsch,  the  noted  Chicago  preacher  and 
scholar,  used  that  expression  recently.  Speaking  of 
the  government  of  our  cities,  he  said: 

We  see  our  mistakes  only  in  brief  paroxysms  of  reform, 
and  then  for  reformers  we  get  all  sorts  of  cranks — women 
with  short  hair  and  men  with  long  hair.  And  the  whole 
trouble  is  placed  on  the  shoulders  of  the  saloon  and  the 
"foreign  element." 

Why  are  our  municipalities  colossal  failures?  That  is 
what  they  are.  Why  are  our  city  governments  the  laughing 
stock  of  Europe?  It  is  because  we  are  doing  things  at 
random ! 

And  if  there  is  anything  that  is  done  at  random,  it 
is  the  treatment  of  the  liquor  traffic. 

Alcoholic  Drink  and  Individual  Temperament. 

The  influence  of  alcoholic  drink  on  the  produc- 
tion of  literature  is  discussed  in  Das  Liferarische  Echo, 
of  Berlin,  by  115  authors  in  reply  to  an  inquiry  as  to 
the  extent  to  which  their  work  is  influenced  by  drink. 
A  majority  declare  they  avoid  alcoholic  drink  while  at 
work,  but  in  their  hours  of  recreation  they  enjoy  wine 
or  beer.  Outside  of  the  direct  effect  on  their  work, 
Adolph  Wilbrandt,  f.  i.,  writes  that  wine  and  beer  in- 
crease the  joy  of  living  and  intensify  his  emotions, 
although  he,  too,  does  not  drink  before  work. 

The  effect  of  alcoholic  drink  upon  the  human  body 
and  mind  is  declared  by  physiologists  to  vary  so  widely 
in  accordance  with  the  peculiarities  of  individuals  that 
statements  of  general  validity  can  be  made  only  with 
the  greatest  caution.  It  is  a  singular  thing  that  this 
principle  is  not  also  observed  more  generally  with  re- 
gard to  the  effect  of  alcoholic  drink  with  reference  to 
temperament.  The  working  powers  of  individuals  dif- 
fer widely  with  temperament.  This  is  particularly  true 

75 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

of  all  literary,  artistic  or  general  professional  work 
which  calls  for  creative  activity.  Some  people  are 
constantly  bubbling  over  with  ideas  and  have  not  the 
slightest  hesitancy  in  uttering  them  by  word  or  pen. 
Others,  equally  full  of  ideas,  and  perhaps  often  better 
ones,  are  temperamentally  disinclined  to  utter  them  or 
commit  them  to  paper.  For  the  former,  an  artificial 
stimulant  may  be  injurious  while  working.  For  the 
latter,  it  is  a  great  boon  to  be  helped  over  that  timidity 
which  stands  in  the  way  of  their  giving  themselves 
out.  This  peculiar  tempermental  quality  which  we 
call  timidity  and  which  modern  educators,  those  who, 
as  Jerome  K.  Jerome  says,  belong  to  "the  modern 
poll-parrot  school  of  philosophy,"  call  "self-conscious- 
ness," receives  invaluable  help  from  the  artificial  stim- 
ulation of  alcoholic  drink. 

The  German  language  has  a  word  to  designate  the 
action  of  alcohol  for  which  I  find  no  English  equiva- 
lent. It  is  the  word  "auslosen,"  to  loosen,  to  liberate, 
to  set  free,  or  something  like  that.  Alcoholic  stimula- 
tion sets  free  the  ideas  which  crowd  our  minds.  It 
does  not  create  them.  It  does  not  help  accumulate 
the  knowledge  on  which  they  are  based.  But  it  loosens 
the  various  elements,  brings  them  together  and  thus 
gives  the  impetus  to  the  utterance  of  works  of  crea- 
tion or  imagination.  And  imagination  is  quite  as  much 
a  part  of  the  work  of  the  scientific  or  other  profes- 
sional man  as  of  the  artist  or  the  writer. 

Social    Influence    Much    Stronger    than    the    Law 

Makes  for  Temperance  Through  Light 

Fermented  Drink. 

An  unusually  able  paper  has  been  written  by  Lieut.- 
Gen.  Henry  C.  Corbin,  U.  S.  A.,  and  published  in 
the  daily  papers.  It  came  to  the  editorial  rooms  of  the 
AMERICAN  BREWERS'  REVIEW  from  a  paper  published 

76 


Social  Influence  for  Temperance. 

in  Houston,  Tex.,  but  the  name  of  the  paper  not  being 
on  the  clipping,  proper  credit  could  not  be  given  when 
the  letter  was  reproduced  in  the  January  issue. 

In  the  inanity  and  asininity  which  makes  up  by  far 
the  greater  part  of  all  writings  on  the  subject  of  al- 
coholic drink,  Gen.  Corbin's  paper  is  remarkable  for 
the  breadth  of  treatment,  the  writer  not  being  con- 
fined, like  most  writers  on  this  subject,  within  the  nar- 
row compass  of  army  life,  on  the  one  hand,  or  prohi- 
bition fanaticism  on  the  other  hand,  but  observing 
the  working  of  forces  of  a  general  social  character, 
"much  stronger  than  the  law,"  as  he  puts  it,  to  which 
he  attributes  the  general  advance  of  temperance.  He 
identifies  the  progress  of  temperance  among  men  "in 
all  their  habits"  with  the  course  of  advancing  civili- 
zation. 

This  is  very  closely  the  attitude  which  the  "Growl- 
er" has  taken  for  the  last  two  years  in  these  columns. 
It  is  extremely  gratifying  to  find  a  man  of  Gen.  Cor- 
bin's influential  position  arriving  at  similar  conclu- 
sions, especially  when  we  consider  the  exceptional  op- 
portunities he  has  had  for  making  observations  in  the 
army,  and  the  fact  that  he  was  formerly  an  enemy  of 
the  "canteen." 

(April  i,  1907.) 

What  is  Needed  is  More  Law  but  fewer  Laws. 

The  anti-alcoholist  movement  has  entered  upon  an 
interesting  phase,  which  has  been  developing  for  the 
last  two  or  three  years,  and  has  now  reached  a  point 
where  its  tendencies  can  be  apprehended  with  consid- 
erable clearness.  Briefly,  there  is  a  decline  of  prohibi- 
tion, but  an  increase  of  sentiment  against  the  saloon. 
It  is  not  necessary  at  this  time  to  prove  this  assertion, 
as  the  facts  are  quite  plain. 

The  conclusion  from  this  state  of  affairs  is  that  the 
77 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

American  people  are  not  opposed  to  the  temperate  use 
of  alcoholic  beverages,  but  they  are  opposed  to  certain 
features  of  the  public  sale  of  such  goods  in  certain 
kinds  of  places  as  at  present  conducted,  and  in  the 
manner  in  which  these  sales  take  place.  It  would 
perhaps  be  more  accurate  to  say  that  their  objection 
is  confined  to  a  very  small  percentage  of  the  existing 
retail  places,  but  they  are  unable  to  devise  any  plan 
for  eliminating  the  objectionable  places,  while  leaving 
the  unobjectionable  ones  intact,  and  for  that  reason 
their  antagonism  takes  the  form  of  objection  to  the 
saloon  in  general. 

This  condition  of  things  has  prompted  Bonfort's 
Wine  and  Spirit  Circular  to  publish  a  review  of  pres- 
ent and  prospective  legislative  action,  concluding  with 
a  suggestion  that  a  national  conference  be  called  of  the 
various  branches  of  trade  interested  in  the  liquor  busi- 
ness, for  the  purpose  of  devising  a  model  license  law 
and  presenting  it  to  the  legislatures  of  all  the  states 
of  the  Union,  urging  its  adoption  as  a  substitute  for 
the  radical  and  impracticable  legislation  that  is  being 
urged  by  the  anti-saloon  league. 

The  Growler  has  for  the  past  four  years  pointed 
out  the  fact  that  the  anti-saloon  league  is  a  far  more 
dangerous  enemy  to  the  brewing  business  and  the 
liquor  trade  in  general,  than  the  prohibition  party  ever 
was.  In  that  respect  he  agrees  thoroughly  with  the 
spirit  of  Bonfort's  article.  He  disagrees,  however, 
radically,  in  regard  to  the  proposed  remedy. 

It  may  sound  trite,  but  must  nevertheless  be  said, 
that  what  we  need  is  not  more  laws,  but  more  law. 
There  is  a  great  abundance  of  laws  in  regard  to  the 
liquor  traffic,  but  there  is  not  enough  law  in  connec- 
tion with  it.  If  any  suggestions  were  to  be  made  in 
regard  to  legislation,  it  should  rather  be  in  the  line 

78 


More  Law,  Fewer  Laws. 

of  eliminating  a  great  many  of  the  existing  laws  than 
of  adding  new  ones.  The  existing  laws  are  quite  ade- 
quate to  handle  the  traffic,  if  properly  enforced.  The 
legislature  of  Illinois,  for  instance,  is  at  present  con- 
sidering a  law  to  establish  a  so-called  dry  zone  around 
Fort  Sheridan,  in  order  to  close  up  the  disorderly 
places  in  the  neighborhood  of  that  post,  which  are 
supposed  to  demoralize  the  soldiers.  Such  a  law  is 
entirely  superfluous.  There  are  enough  laws  now  to 
suppress  these  dives,  if  the  laws  are  properly  adminis- 
tered. To  add  another  law  on  the  statute  books  will 
not  mend  matters  unless  that  law  is  enforced  better 
than  the  existing  ones,  and  if  there  is  enforcement  of 
law,  the  existing  laws  are  sufficient.  Conditions  are 
similar  all  over  the  country.  What  we  need  is  law, 
not  laws. 

We  are  met  with  the  objection  that  our  executive 
officers  cannot  be  trusted  to  enforce  the  laws.  If  that 
is  true,  it  is  a  confession  that  popular  government  is  a 
failure,  and  that  the  country  needs  a  strong  central 
authority,  independent  of  public  opinion  in  the  differ- 
ent localities.  The  Growler  is  not  prepared  to  accept 
so  pessimistic  an  opinion  as  to  the  capacity  of  our 
people  to  govern  themselves. 

Another  serious  objection  is  the  prevailing  legal 
notion  in  regard  to  equal  rights.  This  notion  has  led 
to  stripping  the  executive  officers  of  a  great  deal  of 
discretionary  power,  so  that  in  this  country  many  mat- 
ters are  regulated  by  law  which  in  Europe  are  left 
to  the  discretion  of  the  executive  officers.  That  is  one 
of  the  serious  criticisms  of  the  American  common- 
wealth in  the  famous  book  of  James  Bryce,  the  new 
British  Ambassador  "to  this  country,  whose  publication 
is  used  as  a  text  book  in  many  American  educational 
institutions.  The  distrust  of  the  executive  also  ar- 

79 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

gues  a  lack  of  faith  in  the  capacity  for  self-govern- 
ment, which  lack  of  faith  the  Growler  does  not  share. 
If  there  were  more  law,  and  fewer  laws,  such  precau- 
tions would  not  be  necessary. 

(May   i,   1907.) 

Insincerity  and  Hypocrisy  of  the  Anti-Alcoholists 
in  the  Local  Option  Fight. 

Some  developments  in  the  fight  over  the  "fake" 
local  option  bill  of  the  Anti-Saloon  League  in  the  Illi- 
nois legislature  during  the  past  month  serve  strongly 
to  illustrate  the  insincerity  of  those  who  are  trying  to 
force  upon  the  people  of  Illinois,  as  well  as  of  other 
states,  a  prohibition  bill  under  the  alluring  title  of 
"local  option."  The  "Growler"  has  said  before  that 
he  is  in  no  way  opposed  to  the  principle  of  local  option 
which  is,  strictly  speaking,  nothing  else  than  the  prin- 
ciple of  local  self-government.  In  this  case,  how- 
ever, this  principle  is  employed  for  a  purpose  to  which 
it  is  absolutely  contradictory. 

It  was  pointed  out  before  that  the  "fake"  local  op- 
tion bill  of  the  Anti-Saloon  League  is  not  a  local  op- 
tion bill,  because  it  permits  the  people  to  have  their 
will  only  if  that  will  happens  to  agree  with  that  of 
the  anti-saloon  people,  whereas,  in  the  other  case  the 
people  are  not  allowed  to  have  their  will. 

Late  developments  have  proved  with  startling  clear- 
ness that  local  option  is  a  false  flag  under  which  the 
anti-saloon  people  are  sailing.  On  the  floor  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  during  the  past  month,  one 
of  the  advocates  of  the  pretended  local  option  bill  ad- 
mitted that  it  was  an  anti-saloon  measure  and  not  a 
local  option  measure  at  all.  Other  instances  are  elo- 
quent to  show  that  the  anti-alcoholists  are  opposed 
to  local  option  whenever  there  is  a  possibility  that  the 

80 


Local  Option  a  Pretext. 

people  will  exercise  their  option  in  a  sense  contrary 
to  the  wishes  of  the  anti-alcoholists. 

The  so-called  United  Societies  for  Local  Self-Gov- 
ernment, of  Chicago,  sent  to  the  state  capital  a  meas- 
ure to  provide  home  rule  for  Chicago  in  the  matter 
of  controlling  the  liquor  traffic.  Knowing  what  the 
great  mass  of  the  voters  of  Chicago  think  about  this 
subject,  the  anti-saloon  people  at  once  rallied  in  oppo- 
sition of  this  home  rule  measure.  This  bill,  which  is 
a  typical  local  self-government  or  local  option  meas- 
ure, is  opposed  by  them.  The  so-called  Chicago  Law 
and  Order  League  addressed  letters  to  the  governor  of 
the  state,  the  lieutenant-governor,  the  secretary  of 
state  and  to  every  member  of  the  legislature,  opposing 
the  bill  of  the  United  Societies.  In  this  letter  it  is  set 
forth  that  the  proposition  to  give  the  city  of  Chicago 
full  power  in  regard  to  Sunday  observance  includes 
the  power  to  control  the  Sunday  closing  of  saloons, 
and  that  the  state  ought  to  regulate  this  question  and 
not  the  municipality.  The  reason  given  is  that  the 
Sunday  saloon  is  a  menace  to  the  state  and  that  if  a 
law  were  passed  allowing  any  city  to  regulate  its  own 
Sunday  liquor  traffic,  all  the  municipalities  in  the  state 
would  soon  be  "opened  up." 

On  the  one  hand,  therefore,  we  find  these  people 
standing  up  in  favor  of  local  option,  that  is  to  say, 
in  favor  of  allowing  any  municipality  and  any  smaller 
political  division  to  decide  for  themselves  whether  or 
not  they  shall  have  saloons.  On  the  other  hand,  they 
say  that  the  municipalities  cannot  be  trusted  to  regu- 
late the  matter  of  the  liquor  traffic,  but  that  the  state 
must  keep  this  question  in  hand. 

The  inconsistency  is  manifest,  and  it  is  equally  evi- 
dent that  the  anti-saloon  people  are  not  in  favor  of  true 
local  option,  but  intend  only  to  use  this  principle  so 

81 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 


far  as  it  can  aid  them  in  the  suppression  of  the  liquor 
traffic.  If  a  case  could  be  imagined  where  the  muni- 
cipality was  in  favor  of  suppressing  the  saloon  while 
the  state  at  large  favored  an  open  policy,  there  is  not 
the  slightest  doubt  that  the  anti-saloon  people  would 
take  the  opposite  ground  and  insist  that  it  was  a  mat- 
ter for  the  municipality  to  decide  and  that  the  state 
ought  not  to  interfere. 

Lieutenant  Governor  Sherman  in  the  Illinois  Senate 
strongly  opposed  a  bill  to  give  Chicago  home  rule 
in  the  matter  of  Sunday  observance.  From  his  speech 
on  this  subject,  as  reported  in  the  daily  papers,  the 
following  two  paragraphs,  which  appeared  in  the  order 
given,  are  here  reproduced : 

There  is  not  a  man  in  this  legislature,  native  born  or  of 
alien  birth,  who  can  tamper  with  the  conscientious  scruples 
of  the  people  of  this  state  on  the  subject  of  Sunday  ob- 
servance. There  is  no  man  in  this  legislature  who  can 
vote  for  the  Sunday  opening  of  saloons  without  violating 
the  inheritance  which  he  had  from  his  mother.  There  is 
no  man  in  this  legislature  who  can  tamper  with  the  con- 
victions of  the  people  on  this  subject.  This  has  no  ref- 
erence to  the  enforcement  of  so-called  blue  laws,  but  refers 
merely  to  the  belief  of  a  majority  of  the  people  that  there 
are  some  occupations  which  cannot  be  permitted  on  at  least 
one  day  of  the  week. 

Do  I  suppose  that  failure  to  legalize  Sunday  saloons  would 
result  in  the  closing  of  dramshops  on  the  Sabbath?  No,  I 
have  no  such  expectations.  There  will  be  saloons  open 
somewhere  every  day  in  the  week.  We  have  anti-gambling 
laws  and  still  there  is  gambling.  Laws  do  not  prevent 
crime,  but  there  is  great  difference  between  the  non-en- 
forcement of  a  law  and  its  repeal. 

If  these  paragraphs  mean  anything,  they  mean  sim- 
ply this,  that  the  lieutenant  governor  wants  the  Sun- 
day closing  law  to  remain  upon  the  statute  books  for 
the  purpose  of  satisfying  the  "conscience' '  of  what  he 
calls  the  people  of  the  state.  At  the  same  time  it  is 

82 


Swelling  the  Tide. 

broadly  intimated  that  this  law  need  not  be  enforced, 
since  he  says  plainly  that  "there  is  great  difference 
between  the  non-enforcement  of  a  law  and  its  repeal." 
This  is  another  exhibition  of  that  attitude  of  mind 
which  refuses  to  meet  the  facts  .as  they  are,  and 
which  is  the  cause,  to  a  great  extent,  of  the  unfortun- 
ate condition  in  which  liquor  legislation  is  found,  not 
only  liquor  legislation,  but  legislation  on  other  topics 
as  well.  There  may  be  "consciences"  that  will  be  sat- 
isfied with  a  straddle  of  this  sort,  but  it  will  never 
satisfy  any  person  who  desires  to  square  principle  with 
action. 

(July  i,  1907.) 

How  the  Tide  Against  the  Brewing  Trade  is  Con- 
tinually  Swelled. 

I  am  more  firmly  convinced  than  ever  that  a  vigor- 
ous intelligent  campaign  of  publicity  on  strictly  mod- 
ern lines,  following  patriotic  modes  of  thought,  is  a 
necessity  for  the  brewing  trade.  It  is  becoming  more 
difficult,  the  longer  the  trade  waits.  For,  I  repeat,  it 
is  not  the  occasional  sledge-hammer  blow  that  tells.  It 
is  the  continual,  daily  tap,  tap,  tap  of  the  tackhammer 
in  thousands  of  newspaper  items,  sermons,  public 
speeches,  private  conversations,  etc. 

Here  is  a  case  in  point.  The  following  item  appear- 
ed in  the  Chicago  Daily  News  of  May  29,  1907 : 

DISPUTE   OVER  BEER  COSTS  LIFE. 

Girl  is  Arrested  Follozving  Mother's  Death  from  Brick. 

Elma  Denlow,  15  years  old,  was  arrested  today  following 
the  death  of  her  mother,  which  occurred  after  a  brick 
thrown  by  the  girl  had  struck  the  woman  in  the  head.  The 
girl  says  the  affair  was  an  accident.  The  brick  was  thrown 
in  the  door  yard  of  the  Denlow  home,  40  Webster  avenue. 
According  to  the  girl's  statement  the  missile  was  meant  for 
another  woman. 

Mrs.  Denlow  died  from  tetanus,  said  to  have  been  brought 
83 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

on  by  the  wounds  from  the  brick.  Following  the  notifica- 
tion of  the  coroner  regarding  the  woman's  death  an  inquest 
was  held  this  afternoon  to  place  responsibility  for  it. 

According  to  the  story  told  by  the  girl,  the  trouble  grew 
out  of  her  refusal  to  "rush  the  can"  for  a  neighbor,  a  Mrs. 
Oswald,  59  Perry  street.  This  woman,  it  is  said,  came  to 
the  Denlow  home  May  21,  at  about  5 130  p.  m.,  and  after 
chatting  awhile,  suggested  that  Elma  go  to  Webster  and 
Clybourn  avenues  and  get  her  a  pail  of  beer. 

"I  said  I  would  not  go,"  the  girl  said  today.  "Mrs.  Os- 
wald insisted  and  I  ran  out  into  the  back  yard  to  get  away 
from  her.  She  followed  me,  pulling  my  hair  and  slapping 
my  face  until  I  became  angry  and  threw  a  brick  at  her. 

"She  dodged  and  the  brick  struck  my  mother  in  the  head. 
None  of  us  thought  the  accident  serious  at  the  time.  A  few 
days  ago  mother  began  to  feel  badly  and  now  she  is  dead. 
I  did  not  think  of  doing  anything  so  dreadful." 

The  girl  and  her  father,  Herman  Denlow,  when  questioned 
by  the  police,  told  a  consistent  story,  which  was  corrobor- 
ated by  neighbors. 

Many  a  reader  who  merely  glances  over  the  head- 
lines will  get  the  impression  that  here  is  a  murder 
caused  by  drinking  beer.  Those  who  read  the  item 
through  will  do  so  under  the  impression  created  by  the 
headline  that  the  whole  trouble  was  due  to  the  can 
of  beer  which  no  one  got. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  beer  had  nothing  whatever 
to  do  with  the  case. 

Now,  why  did  the  copy-reader  who  wrote  the  head- 
lines represent  the  matter  in  that  manner?  Simply 
because  a  reference  to  beer  in  connection  with  a  fight 
makes  good  reading,  and  the  brewer  is  an  outlaw  and 
entitled  to  no  respect.  It  is  a  habit  they  have,  our 
newspaper  men.  They  do  not  mean  any  ill,  and  prob- 
ably do  not  realize  the  harm  and  injustice  they  are 
doing.  But  imagine  the  thousands  of  items  every  day 
in  the  year  in  all  the  newspapers  of  the  country !  What 
good  is  an  occasional  editorial  or  a  magazine  article  as 
against  that  constant  hammering? 

84 


Public  Opinion  Misled. 

Another  illustration. 

This  is  from  an  editorial  article  in  the  Providence 
(R.  I.)  Bulletin. 

The  increase  in  the  use  of  the  less  harmful  stimulants, 
which  has  been  marked  in  many  countries  during  the  last 
few  years,  tends  toward  morality.  In  France  beer  has  be- 
come the  national  drink,  thus  reducing  the  field  for  absinthe. 
In  the  United  States  there  also  is  a  drift  away  from  strong 
liquors  to  malt  beverages.  In  more  temperate  beverages  the 
same  tendency  is  to  be  noted  in  this  country  at  least.  The 
use  of  British  colonial  grown  tea  is  yearly  increasing  at  an 
enormous  rate.  It  is  fortunate  that  the  nation  is  following 
England's  example  in  relying  upon  this  invigorating  and, 
used  in  moderate  quantities,  harmless  drink  for  refreshment 
and  stimulant.  *  *  * 

Why  does  it  suggest  itself  to  the  editorial  writer  to 
add  the  qualifying  words  "used  in  moderate  quanti- 
ties," when  speaking  of  tea  as  harmless,  while  he 
never  thinks  of  applying  the  same  qualification  to  beer, 
which  he  sets  down  not  as  harmless  if  used  in  moder- 
ation, but  only  as  one  of  the  "less  harmful  stimulants  ?" 

Simply  because  public  opinion  has  been  so  com- 
pletely perverted  by  the  false  doctrines,  and  especially 
by  the  self-assumed  air  of  superior  morality,  of  the 
anti-alcoholist,  that  even  an  editorial  writer  cannot 
think  normally  when  he  approaches  the  subject  of  al- 
coholic drink.  The  distinction  between  temperate  use 
and  excess  occurs  to  him  quite  naturally  when  speak- 
ing of  tea,  but  is  quite  absent  from  his  mind  when 
speaking  of  beer. 

These  are  merely  random  illustrations.  And  every 
one  will  agree  that  almost  every  issue  of  every  publi- 
cation in  the  country  contains  something  that  in  some 
way  reflects  on  alcoholic  drink.  The  same  is  true  of 
every  public  speech,  sermon,  entertainment,  conversa- 
tion. Out  of  all  these  tiny  drops  there  results  in  the 
aggregate  an  ocean  of  misconception  and  detraction 

85 


Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

concerning  beer  and  other  alcoholic  drinks  which  sim- 
ply overwhelms  the  brewer. 

From  the  Frying  Pan  into  the  Fire. 

The  recent  dispatches  in  the  newspapers  stating  that 
since  the  rigid  enforcement  of  the  prohibition  laws  in 
Kansas  there  had  been  an  enormous  increase  in  the 
sales  of  liquor  by  druggists  for  all  manner  of  pre- 
tended diseases  have  disturbed  our  prohibition  friends 
mightily.  They  will  not  rest  under  the  charge  that 
it  is  only  for  the  last  month  or  two  that  tens  of  thou- 
sands of  people  have  been  regularly  perjuring  them- 
selves in  order  to  get  a  drink.  So  they  secured  the 
publication  of  the  following  statement  in  the  daily 
papers. 

Despite  all  dispatches  to  the  contrary,  the  reports  of  an 
epidemic  of  illness  since  law  enforcement  has  become  prac- 
tically statewide  are,  as  Mark  Twain  would  say,  "greatly  ex- 
aggerated." In  fact,  it  is  such  a  mighty  pleasant  sickness 
that  it  makes  the  Kansas  people  jubilant.  Topeka  druggists, 
who  formerly  may  have  ignored  the  statutes  at  will,  have 
suddenly  betrayed  great  fear  of  the  law. 

As  a  result  they  are  now  requiring  that  applicants  for  li- 
quor shall  make  affidavit  under  oath  and  give  the  disease  for 
which  liquor  is  wanted.  Druggists  to  some  extent  have  not 
previously  done  this,  and  there  was  consequently  no  record 
kept  for  many  sales  regularly  made.  This  is  the  reason  why 
their  present  strict  observance  shows  an  apparent  increase, 
which  is  two-fold  in  some  cases.  There  is,  however,  a  great 
decrease  in  liquor  sales  since  the  brewer  ouster  suits  were 
begun. 

Could  any  inference  be  plainer?  It  is  not  that 
people  are  buying  more  liquor  at  the  drug  stores,  but 
only  that  the  druggists  are  insisting  on  affidavits  in 
accordance  with  the  letter  of  the  law.  Ergo,  the 
people  have  always  been  buying  these  large  amounts 
of  liquor  at  the  drug  stores,  only  the  sales  were  not 
recorded  so  strictly.  This  system  of  perjury  and 


"Dramshop  Laws." 

hypocrisy  therefore  is  not  new,  but  has  been  in  vogue 
for  a  long  time. 

It  does  seem  that  our  prohibition  friends  have  jump- 
ed out  of  the  frying  pan  into  the  fire. 

The    Nonsensical    Character    of    the    "Dramshop" 
Laws. 

Suit  is  being  brought  at  Topeka,  Kan.,  against  the 
Jos.  Schlitz  and  the  Val.  Blatz  Brewing  Companies 
and  a  number  of  citizens  of  Topeka  on  behalf  of  Mrs. 
Margaret  Smith  and  her  four  children.  Damages  are 
laid  at  $40,000  for  each  plaintiff.  Mrs.  Smith's  hus- 
band, Oliver  Smith,  about  a  year  ago  while  drunk 
hunted  up  Thomas  Bair  and  killed  him  as  a  result  of 
a  card  game  quarrel.  He  was  sent  to  the  penitentiary 
for  life.  The  persons  who  sold  him  drink  and  the 
breweries  which  made  the  beer  that  is  claimed  to  have 
made  him  drunk  are  the  defendants. 

Why  is  not  the  law  amplified  to  extend  the  liability 
to  the  manufacturers  and  distributors  of  playing  cards  ? 
Surely  they  were  as  guilty  as  the  brewers.  And,  for 
that  matter,  the  people  who  manufactured  the  table 
they  played  at  and  the  chairs  they  sat  on! 

This  whole  business  of  holding  the  vendor  of  in- 
toxicating drink  responsible  for  the  acts  of  the  pur- 
chaser is  so  unspeakably  nonsensical  that  its  existence 
in  .a  civilized  community  is  scarcely  comprehensible. 

To  a  certain  extent  the  absurdity  of  these  laws  be- 
came evident  to  Judge  Day,  presiding  at  the  trial,  for 
he  dismissed  the  suit  as  to  the  brewers  and  confined 
the  liability  to  the  retailers  who  sold  to  the  intoxicated 
man.  As  one  of  the  attorneys  in  the  case  submitted 
to  the  court,  "by  the  procedure  of  the  Kansas  authori- 
ties it  would  be  possible  to  go  all  the  way  past  the 
brewer  to  the  man  who  had  sold  the  brewery  the  malt 
and  then  get  the  farmer  who  had  raised  the  barley." 

87 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 


Yes,  sir,  and  also  to  the  man  who  furnished  the  ma- 
chinery used  in  making  the  beer,  and  to  the  people  who 
supplied  the  metal  for  making  the  machinery,  and  the 
people  who  dug  the  ore.  Also  the  people  who  made 
the  brick  for  the  walls  of  the  brewery  and  the  man 
who  felled  the  tree  for  the  lumber  used  in  its  construc- 
tion. And  so  on  all  through,  to  the  Power  that  put  the 
iron  ore  in  the  ground  and  bade  the  tree  grow  and 
placed  the  clay  for  molding  the  brick  and  caused  the 
barley  to  grow  and  the  malt  to  sprout.  And  when  you 
have  reached  that  Power,  then  you  have  reached  the 
source  of  all  the  good  and  the  evil  that  flows  from  the 
use  and  the  abuse  of  the  good  things  of  this  earth. 
And  I  propose  that  we  let  the  responsibility  rest  there, 
trying  to  the  best  of  our  ability  to  bring  up  people  to 
the  rational  use  and  enjoyment  of  their  faculties  and  of 
the  products  of  nature  and  of  art  and  industry,  and  to 
learn  that  abuse  in  eating  or  drinking  is  abuse  of 
oneself  and  should  be  eschewed.  But  let  us  bring  up 
men  and  women,  not  puppets  that  cannot  stand  erect 
without  a  prop. 

Indiana's  Supreme  Court  Squelches  Judge  Artman's 
Political  Decision. 

The  big  hullabaloo  raised  by  the  anti-alcoholists  over 
the  decision  of  Judge  Artman  of  Indiana,  declaring  the 
license  law  of  the  state  unconstitutional  on  the  ground 
that  the  legislature  could  not  license  the  liquor  traffic 
owing  to  its  inherently  evil  character,  never  made  a 
great  impression  on  the  Growler.  It  was  so  manifestly 
a  "freak"  decision,  so  plainly  the  special  plea  of  preju- 
dice, that  I  could  not  bring  myself  to  believe  it  would 
ever  hold  water.  The  character  of  Judge  Artman  has 
since  become  clearer.  He  has  been  lecturing  and  pre- 
dicting the  complete  destruction  of  the  liquor  business. 

88 


Artmaris  "Freak"  Decision. 

He  stands  before  us  in  the  lime-light  as  a  man  utterly 
lacking  the  judicial  temperament. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  Indiana  in  the 
case  of  John  W.  Thompson  in  a  prosecution  for  vio- 
lation of  a  city  ordinance  of  Greencastle  by  keeping  a 
saloon  near  the  Big  Four  station,  has  come  out  plainly 
in  support  of  the  right  of  the  state  to  license  the  liquor 
traffic.  The  court  said : 

It  is  well  settled  that  the  several  states  in  the  exercise 
of  their  sovereign  power  have  full  authority,  except  as  re- 
stricted by  constitutional  provision,  to  enact  any  measure 
deemed  expedient  to  suppress  intemperance  and  minimize 
the  evils  resulting  from  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors, 
whether  by  prohibiting  or  by  restricting  and  licensing  the 
sale  of  such  liquors.  In  the  absence  of  legislation,  the  busi- 
ness of  selling  intoxicating  liquors  has  universally  been  re- 
cognized as  lawful,  but  there  is  no  inherent  right  in  the  peo- 
ple to  engage  in  such  traffic  in  any  such  sense  as  to  remove 
it  from  the  sphere  of  legislative  control.  *  *  * 

In  the  absence  of  constitutional  inhibition  it  is  competent 
for  the  legislature  of  a  state  to  delegate  to  municipal  corpora- 
tions power  to  control  and  regulate  the  liquor  traffic  within 
prescribed  territory.  *  *  * 

This  is  surely  as  clear  as  need  be. 

The  prohibitionists,  however,  refuse  to  admit  that 
this  means  what  it  says.  The  Associated  Prohibition 
Press  says  that  the  question  of  the  constitutionality  of 
the  license  law  was  not  at  issue  and  until  the  question 
is  squarely  presented  the  judgment  of  the  higher  court 
cannot  be  anticipated.  Of  course,  literally  this  is  true. 
But  then  the  anti-alcoholists  have  always  paraded  with 
great  gusto  the  utterance  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  declaring  that  the  right  to  sell  liquor  is 
not  a  natural  right  inherent  in  citizenship,  although 
that  was  no  more  than  an  obiter  dictum.  What  is 
sauce  to  the  goose,  is  sauce  to  the  gander,  and  if  there 
is  any  comfort  to  be  had  for  either  side  from  the  mere 

89 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

dicta  of  courts,  the  liquor  people  may  enjoy  it  as  freely 
as  the  antis. 

They  say  every  man  in  Indiana  is  a  politician.  There 
seem  to  be  some  men  on  the  bench,  however,  to  whom 
this  does  not  apply.  If  Judge  Artman  hoped  to  be- 
come a  popular  hero  by  his  decision,  he  finds  his  wings 
clipped  rather  rudely  by  one  of  his  brethren. 

Judge  Charles  E.  Henderson  of  Sullivan,  Ind.,  in 
the  case  of  Dudley  against  the  people  of  Hamilton 
township,  not  only  sustained  the  constitutionality  of  the 
law  permitting  the  licensing  of  the  sale  of  liquor,  but 
administered  a  scathing  rebuke  to  judges  who  allow 
their  personal  prejudices  to  influence  their  judicial  acts 
and  seek  opportunities  to  get  into  the  limelight.  He 
did  not  mention  Judge  Artman's  name,  but  the  allu- 
sion is  pointed  enough  as  it  stands.  Judge  Henderson 
said,  among  other  things : 

It  is  no  small  matter  for  a  circuit  judge  to  take  on  and 
arrogate  to  himself  the  declaring  of  a  law  unconstitutional 
which  has  been  on  the  statute  books  for  more  than  fifty 
years  in  some  one  form  or  another;  has  had  new  enactments, 
numerous  amendments  by  several  different  representative 
bodies  of  the  people ;  has  been  acknowledged  (the  present 
law  that  is  sought  to  be  declared  unconstitutional)  by  six- 
teen legislatures  of  this  states,  and  has  had  nearly  every  sec- 
tion thereof  exposed  to  the  scrutiny  of  the  Supreme  Court 
and  Appellate  Court,  and  in  every  instance  the  validity  of 
the  law,  when  questioned,  has  been  upheld. 

A  circuit  judge  that  has  to  attend  to  the  volume  of  busi- 
ness there  is  in  this  circuit  has  not  the  time  to  put  his  ears 
to  the  ground  to  hear  the  rumblings  of  public  opinion  and 
catch  up  the  strain  as  his  guiding  star  in  deciding  lawsuits, 
nor  has  he  the  time  to  delve  deep  into  the  realm  of  specula- 
tion and  devise  and  hunt  up  high-spun  theories  and  spe- 
cious arguments  that .  will  usher  him  into  the  lime-light  and 
gain  for  him  the  applause  of  the  multitude.  He  must  take 
the  cold  letter  of  the  law  and  decide  a  case  according  to  the 
law  as  it  is,  recognizing  that  both  sides  have  rights  in  court. 
Lawsuits  ought  not  to  be  gauged  by  public  opinion,  but 
measured  by  the  law  only.  *  *  * 

90 


Common  Law  Right. 

If  the  law  granting  a  license  is  invalid,  then  the  penal 
statutes  on  the  liquor  question  are  invalid,  and  if  the  penal 
statutes  for  the  violation  of  the  liquor  laws  are  wiped  out 
then  the  sale  of  liquor  would  be  as  free  in  most  instances  as 
the  sale  of  dry  goods,  hardware,  groceries,  or  any  other 
commodities.  The  truth  of  the  matter  is  that  the  law  recog- 
nizes a  public  ban  on  the  liquor  business  and  regards  it  as 
dangerous  to  public  and  private  morals,  public  peace  and  the 
good  order  of  society,  and  therefore,  has  imposed  heavy 
burdens  upon  it  and  severe  restrictions  and  liabilities  on 
those  engaged  in  the  business.  *  *  * 

I  am  constrained  to  overrule  the  demurrer  to  the  applica- 
tion and  grant  the  license,  and,  in  doing  so,  I  believe  I  am 
following  the  law  and  performing  a  service  to  those  assert- 
ing the  unconstitutionality  of  the  law  in  that  an  opportunity 
is  presented  to  put  the  matter  before  the  Supreme  Court. 

Probably  the  political  ambitions  of  the  judge  whom 
Judge  Henderson  had  in  mind  will  soon  receive  their 
quietus.  In  putting  one's  "ears  to  the  ground  to  hear 
the  rumblings  of  public  opinion  and  catch  up  the  strain 
as  his  guiding  star,  in  deciding  lawsuits,"  one  is  apt 
to  misconstrue  the  noise  one  hears.  They  say  that 
Beethoven  was  once  told  by  some  admirers  that  when 
he  wrote  a  certain  piece  of  music  he  no  doubt  heard 
in  his  mind  the  rolling  of  thunder  or  the  roar  of  hun- 
dreds of  cannon,  and  he  rudely  ^shocked  his  friends 
by  quietly  saying :  "No,  I  just  heard  a  runaway  horse 
coming  down  the  street."  Judge  Artman  probably  has 
also  heard  of  the  three  little  tailors  who  petitioned 
Parliament  in  the  name  of  "We,  the  people  of  Great 
Britain." 

The  opinion  of  the  anti-alcoholists  is  not  the  "public 
opinion"  of  America. 

Not  quite! 

To  Sell  Liquor  is  a  Common  Law  Right. 

Since  the  above  was  written  the  supreme  court  of 
Indiana  has  had  the  question  of  the  constitutionality 

91 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

of  license  laws  squarely  presented  to  it  in  the  so-called 
Sopher  case  in  which  Judge  Ira  Christian  of  Noble- 
ville  had  followed  Judge  Artman.  The  supreme  court 
declares  the  position  that  the  license  laws  are  uncon- 
stitutional wholly  untenable  and  indefensible.  It  shows 
that  as  early  as  1535  the  English  Parliament  licensed 
and  controlled  the  liquor  traffic  and  that  license  laws 
have  existed  in  Indiana  since  1807,  beginning  with  a 
territorial  law.  The  overthrow  of  the  statutes  regulat- 
ing the  liquor  traffic  would,  says  the  court,  "operate 
to  restore  all  persons  to  their  unrestricted  rights  under 
the  common  law  to  retail  intoxicating  liquors,  and  all 
who  desire  to  engage  in  the  traffic  could  do  so  with- 
out regard  to  their  fitness,  or,  in  other  words,  abso- 
lutely unrestricted." 

That  not  only  settles  the  "freak"  decision  of  Judge 
Artman  but  also  demolishes  one  of  the  pet  contentions 
of  the  anti-alcoholists  that  the  right  to  sell  liquor 
is  not  a  common  law  right.  The  court  here 
distinctly  recognizes  the  right  of  every  person  to 
sell  liquor  without  any  restriction  except  such  as 
may  be  imposed  by  law.  This  reverses  the  en- 
tire standing  of  the  liquor  business  in  Indiana,  giv- 
ing it  a  much  stronger  footing  than  it  ever  had 
before.  It  puts  the  business  on  an  equality  with 
all  other  occupations,  permitting  it  to  do  everything 
that  is  allowed  in  any  other  business  except  what  is 
distinctly  prohibited  by  statute. 

Once  more,  the  prohibitionists  have  been  hoist  by 
their  own  petard!  An  important  step  has  been  taken 
towards  upsetting  the  arbitrary  doctrine  heretofore 
held  by  our  courts  that  the  liquor  traffic  has  no  com- 
mon law  right  to  exist  and  is  only  tolerated  to  the  ex- 
tent that  statutes  distinctly  permit  it. 


92 


Lesson  from  Georgia. 

(August  i,  1907.) 
The  Lesson  from  Georgia's  Lapse  into  Prohibition. 

The  recent  success  of  prohibition  in  the  South  bears 
out  the  contention  repeatedly  made  in  these  columns 
that  temperance — using  this  word  in  its  proper  sense 
of  moderation  in  all  things — is  the  most  decisive  char- 
acteristic distinguishing  the  higher  grades  of  culture 
from  the  lower  ones.  What  is  safe  for  the  white  man 
is  not  necessarily  safe  for  the  colored  man. 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  the  only  way  to 
prevent  the  improper  use  of  alcoholic  beverages  on  the 
part  of  the  colored  people  is  to  prohibit  its  use  by 
anybody  whatever.  The  fact  that  no  other  remedy 
could  be  found  serves  only  to  emphasize  the  immaturity 
of  public  opinion  in  regard  to  the  drink  question. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  the  white  people  of  the  state  of 
Georgia,  for  instance,  have  not  the  least  idea  of  giving 
up  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages,  notwithstanding  the 
adoption  of  the  prohibition  law.  No  doubt  they  count 
upon  being  able  to  secure  their  supplies  by  direct  ship- 
ment from  the  adjoining  states.  They  are,  therefore, 
openly  going  into  a  law  with  the  full  intention  of 
evading  it,  or  at  least  evading  the  spirit  of  it. 

Surely  a  better  way  could  have  been  found  to  protect 
the  colored  people  from  the  excessive  use  of  alcoholic 
beverages.  There  has  been  no  lack  of  expedients  in 
the  legislation  of  southern  states  to  restrict  the  parti- 
cipation of  the  negro  in  the  electoral  franchise.  Does 
the  ingenuity  of  southern  legislators  stop  when  it 
comes  to  devising  means  to  protect  the  negro  from 
himself?  The  police  power  of  the  state  is  practically 
unlimited  in  respect  of  the  regulation  of  the  liquor 
traffic,  and  even  seemingly  arbitrary  laws  in  that  direc- 
tion would  have  been  sustained  if  they  tended  to  pre- 
vent excess  in  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages. 

93 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much!3 

I  have  dwelt  upon  this  incident  for  the  purpose  of 
exhibiting  again  the  incapacity  of  our  people,  in  the 
present  state  of  ignorance  and  misinformation  in  re- 
gard to  the  drink  question,  to  legislate  rationally  upon 
this  topic,  and  it  all  comes  back  to  the  old  story  that 
it  is  necessary  to  clear  up  public  opinion  and  to  assist 
people  in  learning  the  truth  in  regard  to  this  problem 
by  putting  them  in  possession  of  all  the  facts  and  try- 
ing to  enable  them  to  approach  this  question  as  ration- 
ally as  other  matters  of  public  concern  are  handled. 

Much  of  the  Evil  Ascribed  to  Drink  is  due  to  Ir- 
rational Eating. 

In  discussing  the  question  of  Federal  supervision 
of  the  Nation's  food  the  Chicago  Inter-Ocean  said  in  a 
recent  editorial : 

Legislation  and  governmental  supervision,  no  doubt,  can 
play  an  important  part  in  the  matter  of  preserving  the  nation- 
al health,  but  in  the  last  analysis  it  is  the  individual  citizen 
who  must  do  the  most. 

It  is  the  man  who  eats  ham  and  eggs  in  the  morning,  a 
New  England  dinner  at  noon,  two  kinds  of  meat,  fried  po- 
tatoes, raw  vegetables,  salads  and  pickles  and  mince  pie  in 
the  evening,  and  a  hot  sandwich  at  night  who  finally  be- 
comes a  disturbing  element  in  the  country,  and  who  may  suc- 
ceed in  so  spreading  the  seeds  of  discord  and  contention 
before  he  reaches  a  sanitarium,  that,  were  it  not  for  the  re- 
straining influence  of  people  who  eat  moderately  and  di- 
gest what  they  eat,  civic  strife  or  even  civil  war  might  be  the 
consequence. 

We  do  not  need  to  have  our  health  Federally  supervised 
if  we  will  only  strive  earnestly  to  refrain  from  swallowing 
things  that  an  ostrich  could  not  assimilate  and  look  pleasant. 
We  should  take  better  care  of  our  stomachs,  which  will  help 
us  to  take  better  care  of  our  minds,  which,  in  turn,  will  help 
us  out  of  the  prevalent  delusion  that  it  is  our  intellects  that 
are  bothering  us  when,  in  fact,  the  trouble  is  solely  with  our 
livers. 

I  do  not  know  whether  the  writer  of  that  editorial  has 
been  reading  the  The  Growler  or  not,  but  there  is  a  cer- 

94 


Bating  is  More  to  Blame. 

tain  resemblance  between  the  thought  of  this  editorial 
and  those  which  have  been  repeatedly  expressed  in  these 
columns.  I  have  insisted  that  much  greater  and  much 
more  harm  is  done  by  irrational  eating  than  by  ex- 
cessive drinking.  If  it  is  a  delusion  that  our  intellects 
are  bothering  us  when,  in  fact,  the  trouble  is  with  our 
livers,  it  is  also  a  delusion  that  it  is  drink  that  is 
bothering  us,  for,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  eating, 
far  more  than  drinking, .  that  is  at  the  bottom  of  so 
much  of  our  trouble. 

Prof.  Irving  Fisher  of  Yale  University  recently  pub- 
lished the  results  of  some  tests  in  regard  to  endurance 
in  muscular  work,  comparing  persons  who  use  the 
customary  diet  with  those  who  abstain  very  largely 
from  the  highly  nitrogenous  foods,  principally  meat. 
He  found  a  superiority  of  endurance  on  the  part  of  the 
non-flesheaters  which  is  simply  astounding.  His  tests 
do  not  cover  the  question  of  strength,  nor  that  of 
general  health,  nor  of  mental  activity.  They  are  con- 
fined to  the  one  subject  of  endurance.  As  far  as  they 
go,  they  seem  to  imply  confirmation  of  Prof.  Chit- 
tenden's  theory  that  the  prevailing  diet  includes  far  too 
much  proteid  matter  and  that  a  better  state  of  vigor 
could  be  maintained  if  the  amount  of  proteid  was  re- 
duced very  greatly. 

While  by  no  means  conclusive,  all  these  tests  con- 
firm the  belief  that  the  average  person  not  only  eats 
too  much  altogether,  but  particularly  eats  too  much  pro- 
teid, which  is  the  most  difficult  to  assimilate  and  the 
most  injurious  to  be  left  in  the  system  unassimilated. 
It  confirms  further  the  position  that  has  been  taken  by 
The  Growler  that  this  kind  of  living  has  much  to  do 
with  the  production  of  many  of  those  evils  which  the 
anti-alcoholist  invariably  ascribes  to  the  use  of  alco- 
holic drink,  to  say  nothing  of  the  fact  that  irrational 
eating  often  directly  contributes  to  excessive  drinking. 

95 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much!3 

It  is  gratifying  to  note  that  now  and  then  the  daily 
papers  are  bold  enough  to  recognize  that  irrational 
eating  produces  people  who  become  a  disturbing  ele- 
ment in  the  country,  criminals,  paupers  and  insane 
people.  Heretofore,  under  the  influence  of  the  anti- 
alcoholists,  most  of  these  things  have  been  laid  at  the 
door  of  alcoholic  drink. 

(September  i,  1907.) 

We  of  the  Twentieth  Century  have  Gained  the  Joy 
of  Living. 

"We  have  gained  some  things  that  the  puritan  had 
not — we  of  this  generation,  we  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury, here  in  this  great  republic.  *  *  *  We  have 
gained  a  joy  of  living  which  he  had  not,  and  which  it 
is  a  good  thing  for  every  people  to  have  and  to  de- 
velop." 

This  quotation  is  taken  from  the  address  made  by 
President  Roosevelt  August  2Oth,  on  the  occasion  of 
the  laying  of  the  corner  stone  of  the  Cape  Cod  Pil- 
grim Memorial  monument  at  Provincetown,  Mass. 
And  I  prefer,  in  this  instance,  to  quote  Roosevelt,  the 
historian,  rather  than  Roosevelt,  the  President  of  the 
United  States.  Coming  from  the  historian  the  words 
have  more  weight,  while  coming  from  the  President 
they  were  more  certain  to  secure  extensive  publicity. 
Roosevelt  has  repeatedly  shown  that,  although  not  of 
Puritan  descent  himself,  he  is  a  student  and  admirer 
of  that  historic  personage.  So  must  every  student  of 
history  be,  for  it  is  doubtful  if  more  important  and 
far-reaching  work  in  the  advancement  of  civilization 
was  ever  done  in  any  period  of  the  world's  history 
in  so  short  a  time  by  so  few  men  as  by  the  epoch- 
making  work  of  the  Puritan.  And  hence,  as  an  his- 
torical personage  we  admire  the  Puritan. 

96 


Evolution  of  Ideals. 

"As  an  historical  personage/'  I  said  advisedly.  And 
it  is  in  that  light  that  Roosevelt  admires  him.  He 
says:  "We  need  have  but  scant  patience  with  the 
men  who  now  rail  at  the  Puritan's  faults.  They  were 
evident,  of  course,  for  it  is  a  quality  of  strong  natures 
that  their  failings,  like  their  virtues,  stand  out  in  bold 
relief;  but  there  is  nothing  easier  than  to  belittle  the 
great  men  of  the  past  by  dwelling  only  on  the  points 
where  they  come  short  of  the  universally  recognized 
standards  of  the  present.  Men  must  be  judged  with 
reference  to  the  age  in  which  they  dwell  and  the  work 
they  have  to  do." 

The  natural  inference  is  that  we  should  hold  fast 
that  which  was  good  in  this  rare  historical  charac- 
ter, discard  that  which  was  faulty  and  add  that  which 
the  new  era  in  which  we  live  teaches  us  to  be  better 
than  the  Puritan  of  two  and  a  half  centuries  ago  un- 
derstood. 

And  here  enters  what  Roosevelt  calls  the  "joy  of  liv- 
ing." That  is  what  we  of  the  twentieth  century  have 
acquired,  which  the  Puritan  had  not,  and  "it  is  a  good 
thing  for  every  people  to  have  and  to  develop."  And 
that  is  precisely  what  the  anti-alcoholist  would  deny 
us.  For  he  represents  the  unreconstructed  Puritan, 
the  one  of  three  centuries  ago,  whose  fault  in  this 
direction  Roosevelt  has  pointed  out  so  tersely. 

Evolution  of  the  Highest  Ideal  of  Living. 

Historically,  the  attitude  of  medieval  Europe  in 
regard  to  the  "joy  of  living,"  was  justified  and,  in  the 
evolution  of  a  higher  ideal,  quite  necessary.  The  me- 
dieval spirit  represented  a  violent  revolt  against  the 
extreme  sensualism  of  the  ancient  Graeco-Roman 
world  and,  as  usual,  those  who  thus  revolted  went  far 
beyond  the  limits  of  reason  in  the  opposite  direction, 
denouncing  as  of  the  flesh  and  the  devil  everything 

97 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

that  savored  of  the  "joy  of  living."  It  is  only  within 
a  comparatively  short  time  that  the  pendulum  has 
begun  to  swing  back  again,  and  let  us  hope  it  will  not 
swing  back  too  far  beyond  the  perpendicular,  though 
there  is  danger  that  it  may,  if  the  present  day  repre- 
sentatives of  the  medieval  spirit  continue  their  atti- 
tude of  hostility  to  rational  enjoyment.  It  is  only 
of  late  that  we  are  beginning  to  believe  that  it  is  not 
wrong  to  enjoy  life  rationally  and,  of  course,  temper- 
ately, that  we  can  look  upon  the  joy  of  living  without 
fear  of  moral  lapse,  and  without  fear  of  degradation 
through  excess.  We  have  outgrown  the  zeal  of  the 
renegade  and  worked  through  into  the  broad  daylight 
where  we  need  not  fly  to  the  cloister  to  avoid  the  dan- 
gers of  lust,  where  we  can  look  upon  the  nude  in  art 
with  freedom  from  improper  emotions,  and  enjoy  the 
good  things  of  the  world  without  fear  of  excess  and 
without  any  feeling  of  wrong-doing. 
Medium  tenuere  beati. 

Enjoyment  of  Food  and  Drink  as  Important  as  Mere 
Nutrition. 

And  while  the  spiritual  growth  of  man  has  been 
tending  in  this  direction,  we  are  receiving  more  and 
stronger  support  from  science  that  the  new  view  is  the 
right  view.  We  are  learning  that  the  active  pleasur- 
able exertion  of  our  natural  faculties  is  conducive  to 
bodily  health  and  mental  vigor,  that  mental  relaxa- 
tion and  pleasure  is  a  fine  tonic  for  mind  and  body, 
that  the  enjoyment  of  food  and  drink  is  as  important 
to  our  physical  well-being  as  is  consideration  of  diges- 
tibility and  nutritive  value.  If  physiologists  prove  by 
experiment  that  even  animals,  such  as  dogs,  are  pow- 
erfully affected  by  the  mere  taste  of  food,  that  the 
mere  odor  of  food  and  the  presence  of  it  in  the  mouth 
will  start  the  flow  of  the  digestive  fluids  in  the  stom- 


Principles  of  Food  and  Drink. 

ach  and  intestines,  how  much  greater  must  such  effects 
be  in  man  where  the  psychical  element  is  infinitely 
more  powerfully  developed  than  in  the  brutes !  How 
much  more  important  for  man,  therefore,  is  the  proper 
consideration  of  the  pleasures  of  the  table,  as  part  of 
the  joy  of  living! 

Important    Definitions    and    Principles    Regarding 
Food  Laid  Down  by  Dr.  Wiley. 

In  his  book  on  Foods  and  Their  Adulteration,  Dr. 
H.  W.  Wiley,  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Chemistry, 
United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  who  has 
achieved  so  much  popular  prominence  of  late  as  the 
champion  of  pure  food,  has  in  the  introductory  parts 
some  interesting  passages  which  I  will  here  quote, 
emphasizing  by  italics  those  parts  which  seem  pecu- 
liarly pertinent  to  the  present  discussion : 

The  term  "food"  in  its  broadest  signification  includes  all 
those  substances  which,  when  taken  into  the  body  build  tis- 
sues, restore  waste,  furnish  heat  and  energy,  and  provide  ap- 
propriate condiments.  .  .  . 

It  (food)  also  includes  those  bodies  of  a  liquid  character 
which  are  classed  as  beverages  rather  than  as  foods.  All 
of  these  bodies  have  nutritive  properties,  although  theif 
chief  value  is  condimental  and  social.  .  .  . 

That  large  class  of  food  products,  also,  which  is  known  as 
condiments  is  properly  termed  food,  since  they  not  only  pos- 
sess nutritive  properties,  but  through  their  condimental  char- 
acter promote  digestion  and  by  making  the  food  more  pal- 
atable secure  to  a  higher  degree  the  excellence  of  its  social 
function.  .  .  . 

Beverages  are  those  liquid  food  products  which  are  more 
valued  for  their  taste  and  flavor  than  actual  nutritive  value. 

It  must  not  be  considered  that  mere  nutrition  is  the  sole 
object  of  foods,  especially  for  man.  It  is  the  first 
object  to  be  conserved  in  the  feeding  of  domesticated  ani- 
mals, but  is  only  one  of  the  objects  to  be  kept  in  view  in  the 
feeding  of  man.  Man  is  a  social  animal  and,  from  the  ear- 
liest period  of  his  history,  food  has  exercised  a  most  import- 

99 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

ant  function  in  his  social  life.  Hence  in  the  study  of  food 
and  of  its  uses  a  failure  to  consider  this  factor  would  be  re- 
grettable. For  this  reason  it  is  justifiable  in  the  feeding  of 
man  to  expend  upon  the  mere  social  features  of  the  meal  a 
sum  which  often  is  equal  to  or  greater  than  that  expended 
for  the  mere  purpose  of  nutrition.  .  .  . 

This  (study)  will  enable  man,  as  a  social  animal,  to  so 
conduct  himself  at  table  as  to  secure  the  greatest  possible 
pleasure  and  social  benefit  therefrom,  and  at  the  same  time 
avoid  any  injury  which  ignorance  might  permit  and  invite. 

I  have  picked  out  passages  which  bear  upon  the 
importance  and  necessity,  in  the  consideration  of  food, 
of  taking  into  account  what  I  have  heretofore  called 
the  psychical  element,  that  is,  the  pleasurable  feelings 
which  the  food  will  arouse  directly  and  indirectly. 

Taste  and  Flavor  more  Prized  in  Beer  than  Nutri- 
tive Value. 

I  find  the  position  lately  taken  in  these  columns 
fully  borne  out  by  Dr.  Wiley.  I  have  sought  to  im- 
press upon  brewers  that  they  make  a  mistake  in  adver- 
tising the  nutritive  value  of  beer;  in  fact,  they  are 
harping  upon  the  least  important  of  the  properties 
of  beer.  Of  course,  I  do  not  deny  that  beer  possesses 
a  certain  amount  of  nutritive  value.  But,  as  I  said 
before,  is  there  anybody  who  will  drink  beer  when  he 
is  hungry?  Beer  is  used  as  an  adjunct  to  those  arti- 
cles which  are  taken  for  nutritive  purposes  mainly. 
It  comes  under  the  head  of  condiments  or  relishes. 
Dr.  Wiley  goes  so  far  as  to  say  of  beverages  in  gen- 
eral that  they  are  "those  liquid  food  products  which 
are  more  valued  for  their  taste  and  flavor  than  actual 
nutritive  value."  We  see  by  this  wording  that  he 
intends  to  exclude  from  the  term  "beverages"  such 
foods  as,  while  liquid  in  form,  still  are  regarded  almost 
wholly  as  nutriment  in  the  stricter  sense  of  the  word, 

100 


Value  of  Enjoyment. 

f.  i.,  milk,  soups,  etc.  The  definition  is  useful  and 
ought  to  be  retained  for  public  discussion  in  that  sense ; 
it  clearly  represents  the  popular  idea  of  the  term,  as 
clearly  as  such  vague  terms  can  be  defined  in  which 
we  try  to  express  new  ideas  by  old  words. 

Expense  for  Pleasure  not  a  Waste. 

I  also  hail  with  satisfaction  Dr.  Wiley's  plain  declar- 
ation that  "it  is  justifiable  to  expend  upon  the  mere 
social  features  of  the  meal  a  sum  which  often  is  equal 
to  or  greater  than  that  expended  for  the  mere  purpose 
of  nutrition."  I  had  never  approached  the  subject 
from  the  point  of  view  of  comparative  expense  for 
such  parts  of  the  meal  as  go  to  mere  nutrition  and  such 
as  go  to  the  social  features  and  the  general  enjoyment 
of  the  meal.  But  it  is  a  useful  question  to  investigate. 
We  are  met  at  least  once  a  year  by  the  so-called  "Na- 
tion's drink  bill,"  wherein  we  are  told  how  many  mil- 
lions are  spent  by  the  people  on  alcoholic  beverages. 
And  those  who  get  up  these  figures  or  secure  their 
publication  generally  designate  all  this  expenditure  as 
a  mere  waste  and  worse. 

Dr.  Wiley  says  that  as  much  or  more  may  be  prop- 
erly spent  upon  the  mere  social  features  of  a  meal — 
whereby  he  means  largely  foods  having  a  condimental 
character,  and  beverages — than  for  the  mere  purpose 
of  nutrition.  When  it  is  considered  that  these  food 
adjuncts  are,  as  a  rule,  quite  expensive  as  compared 
with  the  foods  which  serve  mere  nutrition,  that  state- 
ment seems  conservative.  We  have  ample  justification 
for  saying  that  the  money  spent  by  the  people  for  al- 
coholic beverages  is  not  wasted,  but  on  the  contrary, 
goes  to  the  satisfaction  of  a  food  requirement  fully  as 
necessary  for  the  highest  degree  of  well-being  as  the 
mere  supply  of  nutriment. 

101 


Hie   Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

True  Value  of  Alcoholic  Beverages. 

Moreover,  we  have  here  an  additional  point  to  ap- 
preciate the  statement  of  physiologists  that  while  no 
doubt  alcohol  is  a  food,  it  is  an  expensive  food.  This 
is  doubtless  true,  and  if  the  nutritive  value  of  alcohol 
were  its  only,  or  even  its  most  important  claim  to 
recognition  as  a  proper  constituent  of  beverages,  we 
should  be  obliged  to  admit  that  it  did  not  compare  with 
other  foods  from  the  point  of  view  of  economy.  But, 
as  I  have  insisted  in  these  columns,  the  nutritive  value 
of  alcohol  is  the  least  of  its  claims.  Its  condimental 
value,  the  fact  that  the  beverages  into  which  it  enters 
are  relished,  that  they  heighten  the  enjoyment  of  the 
meal,  promote  the  social  functions  of  food,  animate 
the  psychical  forces  which  are  of  dominant  importance 
in  the  act  of  eating — while  lacking  in  the  act  of  mere 
feeding — these  are  the  considerations  which  lend  to 
alcoholic  beverages  their  permanent  and  solid  standing, 
the  security  of  which  is  being  continually  fortified  as 
science  opens  up  more  the  obscure  domain  of  the  sus- 
tenance of  the  human  system  and  its  maintenance  in 
a  healthy  condition  insuring  the  highest  physical  and 
mental  efficiency  and  happiness. 

The  Truth  About  the  Recent  Statement  of  British 
Physicians  Concerning  Alcohol. 

While  discussing  what  is  partly  connected  with  the 
physiological  aspects  of  the  alcohol  question  it  may  not 
be  amiss  to  refer  to  some  statements  from  physicians 
about  which  some  fuss  has  been  made  in  the  press  of 
late. 

The  recent  pronouncement  in  favor  of  the  value  of 
alcoholic  beverages  by  certain  eminent  British  phy- 
sicians and  scientists  has  been  attacked  by  the  anti- 
alcoholists  as  an  uncalled-for  advance  by  the  liquor  ele- 
ment. It  turns  out,  however,  that  it  was  merely  a  dig- 

102 


Scientists'  on  Alcoholic  Drink. 

nified  response  to  certain  innuendoes  made  by  a  tee- 
total physician  in  Canada  with  the  disingenuousness 
characteristic  of  his  kind.  The  London  Hospital  pub- 
lishes this  account  of  the  occurrence : 

The  question  of  the  dietetic  and  medicinal  position  of  al- 
cohol is  with  us  once  again.  A  number  of  well  known  phy- 
sicians and  surgeons,  together  with  certain  professors  of 
physiology,  have  felt  it  their  duty  to  issue  a  collective  ex- 
pression of  opinion  in  favor  of  the  value  of  alcoholic  bev- 
erages both  in  health  and  disease. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  identify  the  circumstances  which  have 
led  to  this  step.  Not  many  months  have  elapsed  since  a  prom- 
inent metropolitan  surgeon  took  the  opportunity  offered  by 
the  meeting  of  the  British  Medical  Association  at  Toronto 
to  denounce  the  use  of  alcohol  in  every  shape  and  form ; 
to  proclaim  its  utter  uselessness  and  even  its  pernicious  ac- 
tion, in  the  treatment  of  disease;  and  generally  to  condemn 
it  as  a  dangerous  and  poisonous  agent.  Had  these  proposi- 
tions been  presented  merely  as  the  personal  opinions  of  the 
orator  they  might  easily  have  been  passed  over  as  having 
no  other  attraction  than  a  convenient  restatement  of  what 
the  same  authority  had  said  on  many  previous  occasions. 
But  with  them  was  associated  at  least  a  suggestion  that  such 
views  represented  the  general  attitude  of  the  profession  in 
this  country,  and  the  official  position  of  the  speaker  lent, 
as  was  evident  from  the  criticisms  of  the  lay  press,  an  added 
significance  to  this  statement. 

Considering  what  is  the  common  custom  and  habit  of 
medical  practitioners  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic  in  regard 
to  the  use  of  alcohol,  at  least  in  the  treatment  of  disease,  it 
is  not  a  matter  for  wonder  that  a  number  of  clinical  teachers 
should,  even  somewhat  late  in  the  day,  have  determined  to 
put  on  record  views  which  are  in  direct  conflict  with  those 
presented  to  the  Toronto  meeting.  Now  that  the  issue  is 
joined  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  its  discussion  will  be  con- 
ducted in  a  fair  and  scientific  fashion,  and  that  from  it  will 
result  both  light  and  leading. 

What  the  Scientific  Men  Drank  at  Dinner. 

Another  London  dispatch  in  the  daily  papers  re- 
cently told  of  an  argument  ad  horninem  that  was  in- 

103 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

troduced  in  rather  striking  fashion  by  Sir  James  Crich- 
ton-Brown  July  25,  at  the  annual  dinner  of  the  Medico- 
Psychological  Association.  With  the  assistance  of  the 
manager  of  the  dining  room  he  made  a  record  of  what 
each  individual  drank,  and  when  it  came  his  turn  to 
respond  to  a  toast  to  science  he  sprang  his  results  on 
his  surprised  hearers.  He  said : 

"We  have  at  this  table  many  of  the  highest  authorities  in 
the  country  on  the  alcohol  question.  Medical  superintendents 
of  lunatic  asylums  see  much  of  the  evils  of  alcohol.  They 
are  strenuous  advocates  of  temperance;  and  have  supplied 
the  teetotalers  with  some  of  their  strongest  arguments.  It 
is,  therefore,  interesting  to  ascertain  how  far  they  adopted 
extreme  views  on  the  alcohol  question.  There  are  at  this 
table  eighty-four  members  of  the  association,  and  just  5 
or  6  per  cent  have  declined  alcohol  altogether.  The  re- 
mainder, or  94  per  cent,  have  partaken  of  alcohol  in  some 
form,  and  a  large  majority  in  several  different  forms.  I 
dined  a  fortnight  ago  at  Sir  Andrew  Noble's  table  with,  eigh- 
teen leading  men  of  science  of  the  day,  from  the  venerable 
Lord  Kelvin  downward,  and  not  one  of  them  declined  al- 
cohol. It  is  a  farce,  a  gross  hyperbole,  to  speak  of  alcohol 
as  a  deadly  poison.  Those  who  declare  alcohol  a  deadly 
poison  should* also  state  that  we  constantly  carry  it  about. 
Our  bodies  have  more  deadly  poisons  or  toxins,  but  these 
human  poisons  are  harmless  and  may  be  beneficial  as  long  as 
they  are  kept  in  their  right  place.  Our  great  aim  should  be 
to  keep  alcohol  in  its  right  place." 

Confiscating  Property  Under   Prohibition  Laws. 

If  there  had  been  a  campaign  of  publicity  and  there 
existed  today  a  public  sentiment  that  could  deal  fairly 
with  the  people  engaged  in  the  brewing  business,  such 
high-handed  tyranny  as  that  proposed  in  Georgia  f.  i., 
would  be  impossible.  America  is  the  only  civilized 
country  in  which  the  confiscation  of  private  property, 
accumulated  and  employed  under  protection  of  law, 
is  practised  and  sanctioned  by  the  legislatures  and 
courts.  There  are  anti-alcoholists  and  prohibitionists 

104 


Confiscation  of  Property. 

in  England.  But  none  of  them  ever  had  the  temerity 
to  propose  the  suppression  of  the  brewing  business 
without  compensation.  In  this  country,  when  a  legis- 
lature decides  to  stop  the  brewing  business  they  simply 
confiscate  the  breweries  without  a  dollar  of  compensa- 
tion. 

The  Nashville  (Tenn.)  Banner,  after  adverting  to 
the  iniquity  of  the  Georgians  in  confiscating  the  brew- 
eries of  that  state,  says : 

Let  us  take  another  business  by  way  of  analogy.  In  Ten- 
nessee we  have  a  law  forbidding  the  sale  of  pistols  in  the 
state,  a  law  that  does  not  effect  the  end  intended,  as  any- 
one wishing  a  pistol  can  get  one  if  he  has  the  money  to  pay 
for  it.  This  law  is  based  upon  the  demonstrable  fact  that 
the  pistol  carrying  practice  is  a  great  evil  and  that  society 
should  be  protected  by  an  inhibition  of  the  sale  of  the  dan- 
gerous and  deadly  weapon.  But  let  us  suppose  that  a  great 
manufactory  of  pistols  had  been  built  up  in  Nashville,  in- 
volving an  investment  of,  say  a  milion  dollars,  under  the 
sanction  of  protecting  law,  and  suppose  the  legislature  should 
enact  a  law  prohibiting  the  manufacture  of  pistols  in  Ten- 
nessee, and  by  such  an  enactment  cause  the  pistol  manu- 
facturer a  loss  of  half  a  million  dollars.  Would  he  not  feel 
that  he  had  a  just  claim  against  the  state  for  some  repara- 
tion, in  that  his  business  was  not  unlawful  until  the  new 
law  that  destroyed  it  was  enacted?  While  it  is  a  recognized 
principle  of  government  that  the  individual  must  suffer  for 
the  good  of  the  community  if  it  be  necessary,  does  not  a 
consideration  of  equity  obtain  in  the  practical  confication  of 
property  where  there  has  been  no  violation  of  law  upon  the 
part  of  the  owner  and  when  the  property  has  been  built  up 
with  the  consent  and  by  the  encouragement  of  the  state? 
This  question  does  not  involve  the  right  of  a  state  to  pro- 
mote temperance,  except  incidentally,  but  it  seems  to  be  a 
question  involving  property  rights  under  the  law. 

The  same  thing  happened  in  Iowa  and  Kansas  when 
prohibition  was  introduced.  It  seems  that  when 
people  approach  the  liquor  question  they  leave  their 
common-sense  and  their  feelings  of  fairness  and  equity 

105 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

behind,  they  cannot  think  straight,  being  usually  undei 
the  lash  of  the  fanatics  whose  obliquity  of  mental  vis- 
ion incapacitates  them  from  applying  to  this  subject 
the  standards  of  morals  and  decency  which  obtain  in 
regard  to  other  matters. 

Again  an  argument  for  a  campaign  of  publicity ! 

Henry  Watterson  to  the  Rescue  of  Betrayed 
Kentucky. 

For  many  months  the  Nation  has  been  a  mournful 
spectator  of  the  efforts  of  the  enemies  of  happiness  to 
wrap  about  the  beautiful  state  of  Kentucky  the  hide- 
ous garment  of  hypocrisy,  to  deliver  it  to  the  demon 
of  darkness  and  prohibition.  The  work  of  the  anti- 
alcoholists  has  had  the  support  of  certain  political 
leaders  who  hoped  thereby  to  mount  to  office  and  pub- 
lic greatness,  using  that  fad  as  "ambition's  ladder" 
with  the  intent,  no  doubt,  of  spurning  it  when  their 
objects  were  obtained.  We  beheld  the  coils  of  the 
serpent  being  wound  closer  and  closer  around  the  fair 
captive,  chained  by  unscrupulous  politicians  like  An- 
dromeda on  the  rock.  County  after  county  went  into 
the  hands  of  the  "drys"  until  practically  only  three 
counties  could  be  classed  as  "wet."  Sunday  closing 
was  enforced  in  Louisville,  and  there  was  much  said 
of  the  wickedness  of  that  city,  and  especially  of  the 
purveyors  of  liquid  refreshment  therein.  Already  the 
"antis"  were  shouting  in  triumph  and  predicting  that 
Kentucky  would  soon  follow  the  sad  example  of  Geor- 
gia: 

Behold,  on  the  wings  of  eloquence,  armed  with  the 
sword  of  truth,  and  nerved  by  the  fire  of  righteous  in- 
dignation, a  modern  Perseus  to  the  rescue  of  Andro- 
meda, gives  battle  to  the  foul  monster  that  would  de- 
stroy the  state,  deemed  by  its  sons  and  daughters  the 
fairest  of  this  fair  land.  Speaking  as  though  it  were 

106 


Henry  Watterson's  Plea. 

his  last  message  to  the  children  of  what  he  called 
Kentucky's  Acropolis,  his  parting  word  before  leaving 
for  the  great  unknown  country,  Henry  Watterson 
warned  them  against  vagaries  which  "would  blot  Ken- 
tucky out  of  the  galaxy  of  stars  and  recreate  her  in  the 
dread  image  of  Maine  and  Kansas/''  At  the  opening 
of  the  Blue  Grass  Fair  at  Lexington,  August  I2th,  the 
famous  Kentucky  editor  and  statesman  concluded  a 
soul-stirring  address  with  the  following  beautiful  per- 
oration : 

I  am  conscious  that  this  is  the  last  opportunity  I  shall 
have  to  look  into  the  eyes  of  the  beautiful  women  who  irrad- 
iate this  Heavenly  spot  and  to  speak  for  my  neighbors  and 
myself,  man  to  man,  before  a  central  Kentucky  audience. 
My  fathers,  no  less  than  your  fathers,  gave  of  their  blood 
for  this  priceless  heritage.  They  were,  upon  the  one  side  of 
the  house,  yeomen — honest,  peace-loving,  Scotch-Irish  yeo- 
men and  on  the  other  side,  gentlemen  and  cavaliers  and 
fighters.  In  the  direct  Scotch  line,  however — and  I  believe 
as  you  do  in  pedigree  and  heredity — there  was  a  good  old 
minister  of  the  gospel,  my  great-grandfather,  a  Madison  coun- 
ty Presbyterian  preacher,  and  I  trace  back  to  him.  I  am  not 
here  without  warrant  or  commission.  My  own  people,  who 
know  me  best  and  have  always  stood  by  me,  will  indorse 
what  I  say,  when,  the  day  after  tomorrow,  they  come  here 
in  divisions  and  brigades  to  speak  for  themselves.  I  bring 
you  a  message  of  fraternity  in  advance  from  them,  and,  in 
delivering  this  message  I  want  to  plead  before  the  bar  of 
Lexington,  the  happiest  of  cities,  the  cause  of  Louisville, 
the  most  cruelly  maligned.  I  appeal  from  the  partisans, 
whoever  they  be  and  whatever  their  aims,  to  the  reason  and 
justice  of  the  whole  people,  and  I  declare  that  Louisville  is 
neither  the  Sodom  nor  the  Gomorrah  so  often  pictured  by 
these ,  but  a  great  and  noble  city,  full  of  farmers'  boys  who 
came  to  town  from  every  part  of  the  commonwealth  to  bet- 
ter their  fortunes,  still  clinging  to  the  old  rooftree;  a  city 
of  homes  and  altars,  whose  church  bells  echo  vibrant  to  the 
church  bells  of  Lexington,  whose  heart  beats  true  to  the  heart 
of  Lexington,  whose  interests  are  your  interests  and  whose 
God  is  your  God,  in  religion  and  in  morals  something  above 

107 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

rather  than  below  the  standard  of  other  considerable  centers 
of  business  and  population. 

/  protest  against  that  religion  which  sands  the  sugar  and 
zvaters  the  milk  before  it  goes  to  its  prayers.  I  protest  against 
that  morality  which  poses  as  a  saint  in  public  to  do  as  it 
pleases  in  private.  As  the  old  woman  said  of  the  old  man's 
swearing,  "If  there  is  anything  I  do  hybominate  it  is  hypo- 
crisy." In  my  opinion  that  which  threatens  Kentucky  is  not 
the  gentlemanly  vices  of  the  race  course,  and  the  sideboard, 
but  perfidy  and  phariseeism  in  public  and  in  private  life. 

The  men  who  made  the  Blue  Grass  famous,  who  put  the 
brand  of  glory  upon  its  women,  its  horses  and  its  vintage, 
were  not  ashamed  to  take  a  drink  nor  to  lay  a  wager;  though 
they  paid  their  losses  and  understood  where  to  draw  the 
line.  They  marked  the  distinction  between  moderation  and 
intemperance.  They  did  not  need  to  be  told  what  honor  is. 
They  believed,  as  I  believe,  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  pre- 
tending to  more  virtue  than  honest  mortals  can  hope  to  at- 
tain. 

I  know  very  well  how  I  shall  be  rated  for  saying  this; 
how  my  words  will  be  misrepresented  and  misquoted  and 
misconstrued;  I  told  you  not  to  ask  me  to  come  here,  but 
being  here,  I  am  going  to  speak  as  I  am  given  the  mind  to 
think  and  the  light  to  see,  and  to  warn  our  people  against 
the  intrusion  of  certain  "isms"  which  describe  themselves  as 
"Progress,"  and  muster  under  the  standards  of  what  they 
call  "God  and  Morality,"  but  which  fifty  years  ago  went  by 
a  very  different  name;  "isms"  which  take  their  spirit  from 
Cotton  Mather,  not  from  Jesus  Christ;  "isms"  which,  where 
they  cannot  rule,  would  burn  at  the  stake;  "isms"  which  em- 
brace the  sum  of  all  fanaticism  and  intolerance,  proposing 
that,  instead  of  the  rich,  red  blood  of  Virginia,  icewater  shall 
flow  through  the  veins  of  the  people;  "isms"  which,  in  one 
zvord,  would  blot  Kentucky  out  of  the  galaxy  of  stars,  and 
recreate  her  in  the  dread  image  of  Maine  and  Kansas. 

I  refuse  to  yield  to  these.  Holding  the  ministry  in  rev- 
erence as  spiritual  advisers,  rejecting  them  as  emissaries  of 
temporal  power,  I  do  not  intend,  if  I  can  help  it,  to  be  com- 
pelled to  accept  a  rule  of  modern  clericalism,  which,  if  it 
could  have  its  bent  and  sway,  would  revive  for  us  the  priest- 
ridden  systems  of  the  middle  ages.  /  do  not  care  to  live  in 
a  world  that  is  too  good  to  be  genial,  too  ascetic  to  be  hon- 
est, too  prescriptive  to  be  happy.  I  do  not  believe  that  men 

108 


Commonsense  will 

can  be  legislated  into  angels — even  red-nosed  angels.  The 
"blue  laws''  of  New  England — dead  letters  for  the  most  part 
— did  more  harm  to  the  people,  whilst  they  lasted,  than  all 
other  agencies  united.  I  would  leave  them  in  the  cold-stor- 
age, to  ivhich  the  execration  of  some  and  the  neglect  of  all, 
consigned  them  long  ago,  not  embalm  them  and  import 
them  to  Kentucky  to  poison  the  meat  and  drink  and  charac- 
ter of  the  people.  I  shall  leave  my  home,  my  professional 
career  and  my  familiar  associates  to  say  whether  I  do  not 
place,  and  have  not  always  placed,  the  integrity  of  man,  the 
purity  of  woman  and  the  sanctity  of  religion  above  all  earth- 
ly things;  but  /  hope  never  to  grow  too  old  to  make  merry 
with  my  friends  and  forget  for  a  little  that  I  am  no  longer 
one  and  twenty.  When  the  time  arrives  for  me  to  go  to  my 
account,  I  mean  to  go  shouting;  to  go  with  my  flag  flying, 
and,  as  I  never  have  lied  to  the  people  of  Kentucky,  please 
God  I  never  shall.  I  have  told  them  a  great  many  unpalat- 
able things.  I  have  met  their  disapproval  full  in  the  face. 
I  have  lived  to  see  most  of  my  admonitions  against  this, 
that  and  the  other  vain  hope  vindicated  by  events.  I  want 
to  live  yet  a  little  longer  to  tell  the  truth  and  shame  the 
devil;  but  if  obscurity  and  adversity  and  neglect  shall  over- 
take me  it  will  be  a  comfort  even  in  the  valley  of  the  shadow 
of  death  that  from  first  to  last  I  fought,  not  for  the  speckled 
gospels  of  the  short-haired  women  and  the  long-haired  men 
of  Babylon,  but  for  the  simple  manhood  and  lovely  woman- 
hood of  old  Kentucky — never  new  Kentucky,  but  always,  and 
forever,  old  Kentucky — your  birthright  and  mine. 

(October  i,  1907.) 

The    Common   Sense   of   the   People  will   Finally 
Assert  Itself  if  Help  is  Given  to  That  End. 

I  do  not  believe  the  situation  is  desperate,  bad 
though  it  undoubtedly  is.  The  common  sense  of  the 
people  will  eventually  assert  itself.  Of  that  there  can 
be  no  doubt.  Even  now,  when  the  tide  of  opposition 
to  the  brewing  business  seems  to  be  at  the  flood,  there 
are  voices,  now  and  then,  to  call  the  people  to  reason. 

Here  is  something  from  Secretary  of  War  Wm.  H. 
Taft's  book,  "Fow  Aspects  of  Civic  Duty"  which  may 

109 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too 

follow  with  good  grace  the  fine  rhetoric  of  Henry 
Watterson  quoted  here  last  month.     Secretary  Taftj 
says : 

Nothing  is  more  foolish,  nothing  more  utterly  at  variance 
with  sound  policy  than  to  enact  a  law  which,  by  reason  of 
conditions  surrounding  the  community,  is  incapable  of  en- 
forcement. Such  instances  are  sometimes  presented  by  sump- 
tuary laws,  by  which  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  is  pro- 
hibited under  penalties  in  localities  where  the  public  senti- 
ment of  the  immediate  community  does  not  and  will  not 
sustain  the  enforcement  of  the  law.  In  such  cases  the  legis- 
lation usually  is  the  result  of  agitation  by  the  people  in  the 
country  districts  who  are  determined  to  make  their  fellow 
citizens  in  the  city  better.  The  enactment  of  the  law  comes 
through  the  country  representatives,  who  form  a  majority 
of  the  legislature,  but  the  enforcement  of  the  law  is  among 
the  people  who  are  generally  opposed  to  its  enactment,  and 
under  such  circumstances  the  law  is  a  dead  letter.  In  cases 
where  the  sale  of  liquor  can  not  be  prohibited  in  fact,  it  is 
far  better  to  regulate  and  diminish  the  evil  than  to  attempt 
to  stamp  it  out. 

By  the  enactment  of  a  drastic  law  and  the  failure  to  en- 
force it,  there  is  injected  into  the  public  mind  the  idea  that 
laws  are  to  be  observed  or  violated  according  to  the  will 
of  those  affected.  I  need  not  say  how  altogether  pernicious 
such  a  loose  theory  is.  *  *  *  The  constant  violation  or 
neglect  of  any  law  leads  to  a  demoralization  of  all  laws. 

A  North  Dakota  paper  publishes  an  editorial  on  "In- 
temperate Temperance,"  in  which  this  passage  occurs: 

What  license  any  man,  no  matter  whether  he  be  preacher 
or  teacher,  priest  or  layman  or  even  a  newspaper  man,  who  is 
unduly  contentious,  a  traducer  of  character,  a  destroyer  of 
reputations  and  whose  daily  delight  is  to  set  his  neighbors 
"by  the  ears,"  and  who  is,  in  short,  intemperate  in  every  par- 
ticular except,  perhaps,  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  has 
to  insist  that  his  neighbor,  who  is  intemperate  in  the  last 
particular  alone,  is  more  in  need  of  reformation  than  he,  is 
more  than  is  given  us  to  see. 

The  St.  Louis  Times,  in  discussing  Watterson's 
speech  at  Lexington,  has  this  among  other  comment : 

110 


One-day  Morality. 

We  believe  with  Jefferson  that  "No  nation  is  drunken 
where  wine  is  cheap,"  though  he  should  have  added  "and 
pure."  The  introduction  of  beer  in  America  has  done  more 
for  temperance  than  all  the  temperance  societies  and  all  the 
prohibition  laws  combined.  The  result  of  the  anti-canteen 
legislation  is  playing  havoc  with  the  private  soldier  of  the 
army.  "Fanaticism,"  says  Mr.  Woodson,  "is  often  tyran- 
nical in  its  methods."  Fanaticism  is  always  tyrannical  in  its 
methods,  proscriptive  in  its  spirit  and  mistaken  in  its  ends. 
To  the  decision  of  a  question  so  momentous  should  be 
brought  the  force  of  common  sense  and  accumulated  experi- 
ence, not  the  hysteria  of  frenzied  agitation. 

And  in  regard  to  Sunday  closing  let  us  quote  from 
E.  P.  Powell,  a  Unitarian,  writing  in  the  Jewish 
Tribune,  on  "Sunday  Laws  and  One-Day  Morality:" 

Our  churches  should  have  playgrounds  and  gymnasiums, 
as  well  as  sermons.  When  Agassiz  first  came  to  America  he 
complained  that  the  worst  feature  of  society  was  Sunday  re- 
strictiveness.  He  had  been  accustomed  to  hear  his  preacher 
in  the  morning  and  play  ball  with  him  in  the  afternoon.  Even 
John  Calvin  sometimes  adjourned  his  evening  service  and 
went  with  his  congregation  to  the  theatre.  ...  I  write 
as  one  who  rarely  goes  to  a  theater,  but  I  claim  the  green 
fields  on  Sunday.  I  insist  on  my  right  to  take  my  rest  with 
games  that  discharge  the  blood  from  my  brain.  We  are 
an  overworked  nation.  Insomnia  and  insanity  are  multiply- 
ing. Our  time  for  rest  we  must  have,  whether  in  the  middle 
of  the  week  or  at  the  beginning  or  at  the  close. 

W.  H.  Allen,  general  agent  for  the  New  York  As- 
sociation for  Improving  the  Condition  of  the  Poor, 
according  to  the  Chicago  Daily  News, 
decries  the  exaggeration  in  text  books  on  hygiene,  with 
their  charts  picturing  in  purple,  green  and  black  the  alleged 
effects  of  alcoholic  stimulants  on  the  heart,  brain,  stomach, 
liver,  knees  and  eardrums  of  the  drinking  man.  He  in- 
veighs against  texts  drawing  lessons  from  accidental  and  ex- 
ceptional cases  of  the  excessive  use  of  alcohol  and  classing 
moderate  drinking  and  smoking  as  sins  of  equal  magnitude 
with  drunkenness,  while  "overlooking  grave  social  and  in- 
dustrial ills  that  threaten  children  far  earlier  and  far  more 
frequently  than  tobacco  and  alcohol." 

Ill 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

At  Trinity  Episcopal  church,  Sacramento,  Cal., 
Bishop  William  H.  Moreland  delivered  a  discourse  re- 
garding saloons,  taking  his  text  from  I  Cor.  IX,  25, 
"Temperate  in  all  Things."  He  said,  among  other 
things : 

Be  temperate  in  all  things,  especially  in  considering  mat- 
ters relating  to  temperance.  Violent,  intemperate,  fanatical 
speech  and  conduct  are  continually  hindering  this  great 
cause. 

Let  us  clear  the  ground  of  two  mistaken  ideas.  One  is  that 
the  mere  drinking  of  wine  in*  itself  is  a  sin.  The  bible  fre- 
quently condemns  drunkenness,  but  never  the  temperate  use 
of  spirits. 

The  common  Jewish  custom  was  wine  drinking,  and 
neither  the  prophets  nor  apostles  say  one  word  against  it. 
We  have  the  highest  authority  possible,  for  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  Himself  supplied  wine  when  it  was  lacking  at  a 
wedding,  and  it  will  not  do  to  say  that  He  made  unfer- 
mented  wine,  for  scholars  have  shown  that  He  made  the  ordi- 
nary drinking  wine,  which  was  as  much  fermented  as  ours 
is.  Another  false  notion  is  that  the  abuse  of  wine  prohibits 
the  use  of  it.  Apply  this  argument  to  other  things.  Many 
men  use  horses  for  gambling  purposes,  and  thousands  of  men 
are  ruined  by  betting  at  the  races.  Shall  we  then  abandon 
horses  altogether  and  take  to  the  bicycle?  But  many  overdo 
the  wheel,  and  suffer  from  curvature  of  the  spine  and  the 
bicycle  heart.  Shall  we  then  prohibit  the  bicycle?  Some 
people  are  injured  by  drinking  coffee.  Must  all  the  world 
then  give  up  its  morning  cup?  It  never  helps  any  cause  to 
raise  false  issues  about  it  or  defend  it  with  unsound  argu- 
ments. 

And  here  is  a  little  editorial  paragraph  from  the 
Cincinnati  Enquirer  of  September  5 : 

It  is  presumed  there  will  be  another  effort  to  restore  the 
canteen.  Next  time  Congress  should  not  take  alarm  at  the 
flutter  of  petticoats  in  the  galleries  and  lobbies. 

Bishop  Hall,  of  Vermont,  said : 

Prohibition  drives  underground  the  mischief  which  it 
seeks  to  cure,  making  it  more  difficult  to  deal  with  the  evil 
and  impossible  to  regulate  the  trade,  as  for  instance,  in  the 

112 


Opinions  of  Speakers. 

quality  of  liquor  sold.  The  present  law  leads,  I  believe,  in 
many  cases,  to  heavier  drinking  in  clubs  and  at  home,  liquor 
being  purchased  in  larger  quantities  than  would  be  the  case 
if  it  were  possible  to  purchase  at  a  restaurant  a  glass  of  wine 
or  beer. 
The  Rev.  Dr.  Rainsford,  of  New  York,  said : 

Are  we  fools  and  blind  enough  to  believe  that  we  can  sud- 
denly eradicate  an  almost  universal  desire  for  alcohol,  meet 
and  overcome  with  the  presentation  of  an  occasional  coffee 
house?  No.  Our  treatment  has  to  be  much  more  radical 
than  this.  To  drink  is  no  sin.  Jesus  Christ  drank.  To  keep 

saloon  is  no  sin.  And  any  policy  that  claims  the  name 
of  Christ  or  does  not  claim  His  name,  that  deals  with  the 
well-nigh  universal  taste  of  man  for  alcohol  on  the  basis 
of  law  and  order  alone,  can  not  commend  itself  to  the  best 
intelligence  and  is  doomed  to  fall. 

The  Wilmington  (Del.)  News  concludes  an  article 
on  the  Saloon  and  Temperance  with  this  paragraph: 

The  truth  of  the  whole  matter  is,  that  the  modern  saloon 
is  here  to  stay.  The  modern  saloon  is  the  club  room  of  the 
masses  who  do  not  care  to  bear  the  expense  of  fashionable 
club  membership  or  to  maintain  an  expensive  sideboard  in 
their  residences.  If  you  believe  it  is  a  hell  on  earth,  ask  the 
police  or  go  into  one  and  see  for  yourself.  A  common  re- 
gard for  the  truth  ought  to  be  sufficient  reason  for  any  one 
to  ascertain  the  facts  about  the  conditions  that  exist. 

Prof.  Zueblin,  professor  of  sociology  at  the  Uni- 
versity of  Chicago,  in  a  recent  lecture  is  reported  as 
follows : 

The  professor,  in  a  word,  said  that  any  healthy  amuse- 
ment might  be  indulged  in  on  Sundays  as  long  as  there  were 
no  excesses.  Regarding  the  beer  gardens,  his  view  is  they 
should  be  a  gathering  place  for  families  and  friends,  not  for 
the  sake  of  merely  drinking  beer,  but  places  where  the  serv- 
ing of  beer  would  be  permitted.  There  should  also  be  music 
and  other  amusements  of  the  proper  kind. 

In  discussing  Sabbath  observance,  the  Omaha 
World-Herald  says : 

The  time  has  come  in  this  twentieth  century  when  men  of 
enlightenment  must  admit  that  intolerance  is  one  of  the 

113 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

most  baneful  of  all  evils.  It  leads  inevitably  to  persecution 
and  feelings  of  malice.  When  a  man  has  reached  the  point 
where  he  recognizes  the  right  of  other  people  to  their  opin- 
ions, even  though  they  differ  from  his  own,  he  has  made  a 
big  start  toward  his  own  salvation. 

The  above  utterances  represent  only  some  things  that 
happen  to  have  come  to  hand  within  a  week  or  so. 
They  are  here  shown  because  it  is  well  to  stop  once 
in  a  while  and  look  at  the  reverse  side  of  the  picture. 
We  ought  not  to  follow  the  example  of  the  enemies  of 
the  brewing  trade  and  of  temperance,  and  become  so 
taken  up  with  one  idea  as  to  believe  the  whole  world 
revolves  around  that  one  thing.  That  is  the  fanatic's 
way  of  thinking,  and  is  precisely  the  fault  of  the  anti- 
alcoholists,  which  we,  who  stand  for  temperance  in  all 
things,  ought  to  avoid. 

It  is  true,  -the  above  quotations  contain  nothing 
whatever  that  is  new  to  the  student  of  the  drink  prob- 
lem, so-called.  What  interests  about  them  is  the 
sources  from  which  they  emanate  and  the  time  at 
which  they  are  published.  The  point  I  am  trying  to 
make  is  that  there  is  at  the  bottom  a  strong  current 
of  common  sense  in  the  people,  and  the  brewers  ought 
to  make  it  their  business  to  appeal  to  it,  to  arouse  it,  to 
bring  the  people  to  a  realization  of  the  absurdities  and 
abnormalities  to  which  they  are  being  led  by  a  lot  of 
defectives  who  insist  that  because  they  themselves  are 
morbid,  healthy  people  shall  live  in  hospitals  or  ac- 
cording to  hospital  regimen. 

(November  i,  1907.) 

How  the  Watterson  Fight  Looks  to  the  Man  Up 
a  Tree. 

The  anti-alcoholists,  both  prohibitionists  and  anti- 
saloonists,  have  been  greatly  shocked  and  scandalized 
by  the  flaying  they  got  from  Henry  Watterson  at  Lex- 

114 


Prom  Up  a  Tree. 

ington,  which  was  printed  in  last  month's  AMERICAN 
BREWERS'  REVIEW.  "It  hurts  one's  conscience  to  be 
found  out."  And  in  this  case,  the  fellow  that  roasted 
them  was  not  a  poor  benighted  "literary  hack"  in  the 
pay  of  the  rum  devil  nor  an  imp  of  satan  in  the  form 
of  a  brewer  whom  they  could  lambaste  with  impunity, 
but  it  was  a  leading  journalist  and  one  of  the  fore- 
most statesmen  of  the  south,  the  idol  of  the  state  of 
Kentucky  and  one  worshipped  for  many  years  by  all 
true  southerners  and  admired  by  numerous  friends  in 
the  north.  Brother  Watterson  is  being  soundly  rated 
by  the  anti-alcoholist  speakers  and  writers,  as  he  ex- 
pected to  be.  And  yet  I  have  a  sneaking  notion  he  did 
not  expect  it  would  be  quite  so  bad.  He  never  before 
realized  what  it  meant  to  be  exposed  to  the  mud  bat- 
teries of  the  anti-alcoholists.  We  who  have  had  the 
benefit  of  these  mud  baths  for  years  know  what  they 
are.  We  realize  our  helplessness.  We  feel  constantly 
how  the  anti-alcoholists  are  all  the  time  filling  the 
newspapers  of  the  country  with  their  fake  news,  their 
pseudo-science  and  their  "pipe  dreams"  regarding 
social  and  economic  conditions,  while  the  brewers, 
whom  they  charge  with  controlling  the  press,  never 
get  a  word  in  edgewise. 

I  confess  to  a  certain  mild  satisfaction  at  Brother 
Watterson's  sojourn  in  hot  water.  Everybody  has  a 
certain  amount  of  meanness  in  him,  and  I  suppose  it 
is  my  meanness  that  gives  me  the  joy  over  his  situa- 
tion. Brother  Watterson,  however,  is  a  fighter.  He 
answers  back.  He  refuses  to  be  measured  by  what  he 
calls  the  "moral  yardstick"  of  these  Pecksniffs,  or  to 
take  his  instructions  from  the  "professional  moralist" 
who,  he  says,  "is  as  a  mile-post,  perpetually  telling 
other  people  the  way,  yet  never  arriving  there  itself." 
When  Brother  Watterson  gets  riled,  he  even  calls 
names.  "Newspaper  polecats"  is  one  of  the  terms  of 

115 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

endearment  he  applies  to  his  assailants;  "the  old  he- 
goat  liar"  is  another  shot.    Says  Henry : 

What  would  become  of  us  if  we  could  not  cook  our  moral 
rabbit  under  the  warm  lids  of  perfidy  and  pharisaism,  where 
the  greatest  man  is  the  biggest  liar,  and  the  most  eminent 
statesman  the  slickest  and  least  conscientious  politician? 
.  .  .  .  Our  assailants  either  do  not  realize  the  enormity 
of  lying,  else  they  do  not  care,  or — in  many  cases  we  doubt 
not — they  fancy  that  they  can  lie  without  detection,  preferr- 
ing to  lie  than  to  tell  the  truth.  That  must  indeed  be  a  bad 
cause  that  needs  to  be  propped  and  promulgated  by  such 
means.  Yet,  as  all  history  shows,  religion  mixed  up  with 
things  temporal,  quickly  takes  on  fanaticism.  Morality  be- 
coming an  asset,  gets  to  be  a  beggar-on-horseback,  and  here- 
sy to  the  pervailing  hysteria  assumes  the  dimensions  of  the 
unforgiveable  sin,  to  be  visited  with  the  inquisition  and  the 
stake.  .  . 

I  do  not  like  to  call  names.  But  there  are  times 
when  I  feel  as  did  a  young  lady  whom  I  once  saw 
crossing  a  muddy  street  and  who,  getting  caught  be- 
tween teams  going  in  opposite  directions,  was  splashed 
all  over  with  mud.  A  man  beside  her,  caught  in  the 
same  predicament,  relieved  his  feelings  with  some  vio- 
lent oaths,  whereupon  the  lady  turned  to  him  and  said 
with  a  sweet  smile :  "Thank  you,  sir ;  thank  you !" 

Excess  in  the  Use  of  Alcoholic  Drink  is  a  Symptom 
of  a  Defective  Nature,  Not  a  Cause  of  it. 

It  is  time  publicly  to  recognize  the  fact  well  under- 
stood by  alienists  that  excess  in  the  use  of  alcoholic 
drink,  drunkenness,  alcoholism,  is  to  a  very  small  ex- 
tent the  result  of  any  habit  of  the  individual  concerned 
in  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages.  The  drunkard  is  a 
defective  to  begin  with,  and  his  nervous  unsoundness 
may  take  many  different  forms.  In  an  interview  in 
London  Dr.  Carlos  F.  MacDonald,  a  noted  alienist  of 
New  York,  was  recently  quoted  as  saying: 

116 


Expression  of  Defectiveness. 

My  experience  and  observations  lead  me  to  attach  less 
importance  to  so-called  exciting  causes  and  greater  import- 
ance to  the  predisposing  causes.  Substantially  every  individ- 
ual during  the  most  active  stage  of  his  life,  the  stage  at 
which  insanity  is  most  frequent,  is  almost  daily  exposed  to 
so-called  exciting  causes,  or  what  I've  characterized  as  the 
four  causes — wine,  women,  worry  and  work — and  yet  it  is 
a  fact  that  sanity  is  the  rule  and  insanity  is  the  exception  of 
life.  Only  those  who  are  endowed  with  unstable  mental 
and  nervous  organization,  whether  inherited  or  acquired,  suc- 
cumb to  mental  disease  under  the  influence  of  these  exciting 
causes,  hence  the  great  underlying  cause  of  all  these  forms 
of  insanity,  to  my  mind,  is  heredity. 

The  offspring  of  an  anti-alcoholist  is  far  more  likely 
to  become  a  drunkard  than  the  offspring  of  a  temper- 
ate user  of  alcoholic  beverages. 

Dr.  Eugene  S.  Talbot,  in  his  book  on  "Degeneracy, 
Its  Causes,  Signs  and  Results,"  says: 

That  excess  in  alcohol  frequently  occurs  in  degenerate 
stocks  is  undeniable.  But,  as  Krafft-Ebing,  Kiernan,  Spitz- 
ka  and  others  have  shown,  intolerance  of  alcohol  is  an  ex- 
pression of  degeneracy.  The  person  intolerant  of  alcohol 
becomes  either  a  total  abstainer  because  of  a  personal  idio- 
syncrasy (like  that  which  forbids  certain  people  to  eat  shell- 
fish lest  nettle-rash  occur)  or  because  of  parsimony,  or  for 
both  reasons  combined.  Such  total  abstainers  leave  degen- 
erate offspring  in  which  degeneracy  assumes  the  type  of  ex- 
cess in  alcohol  as  well  as  even  lower  phases. 

The  person  who  lives  a  normal,  wholesome  life,  who 
does  not  sacrifice  everything  to  business  success  or 
economic  efficiency,  who  believes  in  the  "joy  of  living" 
and  indulges  in  it  to  a  proper  extent,  who  does  not 
keep  his  nerves  at  extreme  tension  and  his  powers  at 
high  pressure  all  the  time,  who  enjoys  literature,  art, 
nature,  sport,  who  gives  rein  to  the  domestic  affec- 
tions, and  who  in  his  eating  and  drinking  includes  the 
temperate  use  of  alcoholic  beverages,  he  is  the  one 
whose  offspring  is  likely  to  be  normal,  whose  children 
will  become  neither  drunkards  nor  criminals  nor  pau- 

117 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

pers,  nor  insane,  whereas,  on  the  other  hand,  the  man 
who  gives  up  all  for  wealth  and  business  success  or 
economic  efficiency,  who  denies  himself  the  joys  of 
life,  who  pinches  and  saves  in  order  to  swell  his  bank 
account,  and  who  abstains  from  all  alcoholic  beverages, 
and  the  woman  who  lives  the  parasitical  life  of  "so- 
ciety," who  shuns  alcoholic  drink,  but  indulges  to  ex- 
cess in  tea  and  coffee,  these  are  the  persons  whose  off- 
spring are  much  more  likely  to  be  degenerate,  and  the 
degeneracy  may  quite  readily  take  the  form  of  ex- 
cessive use  of  alcohol. 

Others  May  Learn  How  it  Feels  to  be  Abused  by 
the  Anti-Alcoholists. 

It  really  does  one  good  to  see  an  eminent  and  re- 
spectable man  like  Henry  Watterson — at  least  so  he 
was  heretofore,  though,  of  course,  he  is  no  longer  on 
the  list  of  respectables  kept  by  the  anti-alcoholists — 
getting  a  dose  of  what  we  have  been  getting  every 
day  for  years.  If  they  goad  him  enough,  he  may, 
perhaps  conclude  that  as  these  people  are  now  lying 
about  him,  they  have  been  and  are  now  and  will  con- 
tinue to  be  lying  about  other  people,  and  that  their 
charges  against  the  beverage  traffic  are  really  not  much 
better  than  a  tissue  of  lies. 

Somewhat  in  line  with  these  occurrences  and  reflec- 
tions is  an  editorial  article  which  appeared  September 
15  in  the  Chicago  Inter-Ocean.  It  may  be  well  to 
quote  it  in  full : 

A  recent  experience  of  the  New  York  Times  with  one  W. 
P.    White    of    Philadelphia    illustrates    how    men   professing 
the  most  exalted   ideals   often  will   distort  facts   and  garble 
figures   in   order   to    sustain   some   personal    hobby — will,    in 
fact,   circulate  downright  lies   as  truth  and  salve  their  con- 
sciences with  the  notion  that  they  are  "doing  good." 
The  annual  report  of  the  judge  advocate  general  showed, 
as  has  every  such  report  for  the  last  six  years,  that  drunk- 

118 


Getting  Acquainted. 

enness  and  the  crimes  flowing  from  it  had  increased  in  the 
army  since  the  abolition  of  the  canteen.  The  Times  noted 
the  fact  and  made  appropriate  comments. 

Thereupon  Mr.  White  wrote  a  letter  alleging  that  just 
the  contrary  was  true,  and  giving  figures,  professedly  taken 
from  the  official  report,  showing  that  general  courts-martial 
had  decreased  from  6,680  in  1900  to  4,596  in  1906,  and  that 
cases  of  drunkenness  before  such  courts  had  decreased  from 
1,645  in  1900  to  504  in  1906. 

The  truth  is,  as  the  Times  has  ascertained  by  thorough 
investigation  at  Washington,  that  since  the  power  of  in- 
ferior military  courts  was  extended  by  the  act  of  March  2, 
1901,  there  have  been  practically  no  trials  for  drunkenness 
by  general  courts-martial,  and  that  the  decrease  of  such 
cases  alleged  by  Mr.  White  was  merely  a  decrease  of  pleas  of 
drunkenness  as  an  extenuating  circumstance  of  more  serious 
crimes. 

Since  1904  the  convictions  had  in  the  inferior  military 
courts  have  averaged  from  40,000  to  45,000  a  year,  and  about 
60  per  cent,  of  these  were  for  drunkenness.  Says  the  Times 
in  comment  on  the  incident: 

"The  White  letter  which  was  inadvertently  printed  before 
investigation,  is  now,  presumably,  part  of  the  campaign  am- 
munition in  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  strongholds  of  the  country. 
Their  guns,  by  a  strange  perversion  of  feminine  logic,  are 
still  trained  in  defense  of  the  dives  that  benefit  by  the  pro- 
visions of  the  anti-canteen  law  to  corrupt  the  army." 

The  comment  is  severe,  but  it  is  justified  by  the  facts. 
It  is  certainly  one  of  the  strangest  exhibitions  of  moral 
obtuseness  on  record  that  persons  whose  station  and  pro- 
fessions should  make  them  examples  of  truthfulness  should 
persist  in  circulating  lies  that  sustain  conditions  making  for 
immorality,  and  that  respectable  women  should  organize  and 
agitate  for  laws  which  make  the  keeping  of  dives  profitable. 

"Downright  lies,"  "moral  obtuseness,"  "circulating 
lies" — you  are  getting  along,  gentlemen! 

Will  the  Newspapers  and  Public  at  Last  Discover 
the  Character  of  the  Anti-Alcoholists? 

It  would  be  an  easy  matter  to  add  to  the  catalogue 
of  lies  fathered  by  the  anti-alcoholists,  such  as  the  lies 

119 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

in  the  school  text-books  on  physiology  deliberately  per- 
sisted in  after  their  attention  had  been  called  to  them 
by  the  most  eminent  physiologists  of  the  country;  the 
perjuries  resorted  to  in  persecuting  liquor  dealers,  etc. 
But  that  is  not  necessary  at  this  point.  In  fact,  I  am 
satisfied  to  leave  the  charging  up  of  lies  to  such  writ- 
ers as  those  above  quoted.  I  only  hope  the  newspaper- 
men of  the  country  will  awaken  to  the  fact  that  they 
are  being  deliberately,  systematically  and — the  pity  of 
it ! — successfully  "stuffed"  almost  every  day  of  the  year 
by  those  fertile  dreamers  of  dreams.  Some  of  their 
lies  are  being  exposed.  Will  the  newspapermen  con- 
tinue to  believe  their  statements?  In  law  there  is  a 
principle  falsus  in  uno,  falsus  in  omnibus  (false  in  one, 
false  in  all). 

A   Masterly   Document   by   the   German   Brewers' 
Association, 

I  do  not,  as  a  rule,  like  to  take  examples  from  out- 
side of  this  country  when  questions  of  policy  are  in- 
volved, as  conditions  are  very  different  in  other  coun- 
tries. But  there  is  an  instance  in  point  just  now  that 
ought  not  to  be  passed  over.  In  Germany  there  has 
begun,  in  quite  recent  years,  a  similar  fanatical  anti- 
alcoholist  movement  as  in  America,  The  German 
brewers,  however,  do  not  sit  idly  by  and  allow  this 
propaganda  to  gain  such  terrific  headway  as  it  has 
done  here.  Although  the  movement  of  the  "antis"  re- 
mains as  yet  quite  insignificant,  the  German  brewers 
have  already  begun  active  work  to  check  it.  Elsewhere 
in  this  issue  is  printed  passages  from  an  open  letter 
by  Mr.  Henrich,  of  Frankfort,  president  of  the  Ger- 
man brewers'  association,  which  I  can  commend  to  the 
careful  consideration  of  every  American  brewer.  That 
letter,  and  especially  the  reply  to  Mr.  Hansen's  an- 
swer, is  a  masterpiece  of  defense  of  the  brewing  trade. 

120 


Immorality  of  Anti-Drink  Position. 

It  brings  out,  in  fine  style,  what  "The  Growler"  has 
frequently  enlarged  upon  in  these  columns.  It  refers 
more  particularly  to  the  intangible,  imponderable  things 
in  life,  the  higher  life,  those  matters  which  cannot  be 
expressed  in  terms  of  economic  efficiency  or  money 
making  power,  but  rest  in  the  ideal  part  of  human 
nature,  that  part  which  the  anti-alcoholist  persistently 
ignores. 

It  is  a  matter  of  gratification  to  find  these  aspects 
of  the  alcohol  question  handled  by  such  an  authority, 
not  only  because  he  handles  them  with  consummate 
skill,  but  because  he  makes  them  the  chief  defense  of 
the  brewing  business.  That  is  a  line  which  the  Ameri- 
can brewer  has  heretofore  sadly  neglected. 

The  economic  aspect  of  the  question,  on  the  other 
hand,  is  made  far  less  prominent.  And  therein  also 
the  American  brewer  might  do  well  to  learn  from  Mr. 
Henrich,  if  he  refuses  to  accept  the  advice  given  by 
American  writers,  as  he  has  heretofore  done.  What 
does  the  economic  argument  amount  to?  Do  you  ex- 
pect to  stop  the  anti-alcohol  propaganda  by  calling  at- 
tention to  the  destruction  of  property  values  it  involves, 
the  throwing  out  of  employment  of  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  people,  the  depreciation  of  farm  lands,  and 
such  matters?  Did  these  arguments  carry  any  weight 
in  Maine,  in  Iowa,  in  Kansas  ?  What  did  similar  argu- 
ments avail  against  the  agitation  for  the  abilition  of 
slavery?  Was  not  the  freeing  of  the  slaves  the  de- 
struction of  the  greater  part  of  the  wealth  of  the  south- 
ern states,  the  impoverishment  of  hundred  of  thousands 
of  people,  the  wiping  out  of  land  values,  and  general 
economic  ruin?  And  how  far  did  those  arguments  go 
at  that  time,  as  against  those  which  appealed  to  the 
better  nature  of  man,  the  ideals  of  a  higher  culture? 

Not  that  the  economic  argument  should  be  entirely 
ignored !  But  the  arguments  based  upon  psychical  and 

121 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

ideal  grounds  and  addressed  to  those  things  which  go 
to  elevating  the  standards  of  living,  health,  happiness, 
morality  and  the  joy  of  living,  should  be  the  main 
part  of  the  brewer's  defense  of  his  business. 

How  paltry  the  arguments  of  the  anti-alcoholists 
appear  when  viewed  in  the  light  of  these  things  of  the 
mind  and  the  soul ! 

Inhumanity  and  Immorality  of  the  Anti-Alcoholist 
Proposition. 

Air.  Henrich  says  the  proposals  of  the  anti-alcohol- 
ists are  "inhuman!" 

He  also  says  they  are  "immoral." 

Yes,  yes !    So  they  are,  most  emphatically. 

What  can  be  more  inhuman  than  to  destroy  what 
little  comfort  and  joy  the  workingman  can  extract  from 
life  by  the  indulgence  in  a  glass  of  beer,  warming  up 
his  heart  in  the  bosom  of  his  family,  or,  if  he  is  not 
fortunate  enough  to  have  one,  unfolding  to  him  the 
beauties  of  close  companionship  with  his  fellows? 

And  what  can  be  more  immoral  than  to  strip  life  of 
that  which  adorns  it,  that  which  raises  man  for  a  time 
out  of  the  dreariness  of  everyday  life,  out  of  the  strug- 
gle for  wealth  or  economic  efficiency — the  great  watch- 
word of  the  "antis" — and  permits  him  to  indulge  his 
ideals,  to  follow  his  day  dreams?  Does  not  "the 
dreamer  live  forever,  and  the  toiler  die  in  a  day?" 
Whence  is  he  to  get  the  inspiration  for  a  moral  life 
but  from  his  ideals,  from  the  times  when,  as  Henry 
Watterson  said,  he  "forgets  for  a  time  that  he  is  no 
longer  one-and-twenty,"  when  the  fervor  of  youth  for 
all  that  is  good  and  beautiful  comes  back  upon  him 
and  warms  up  the  soul  which  is  being  slowly  frozen 
up  in  the  icy  flood  of  the  struggle  for  bread  and 
wealth  ? 

122 


& 


Cleaning  Up. 


As  Byron  says : 


There's  not  a  joy  the  world  can  give  like  that  it  takes  away 
When  the  glow   of  early  thought  declines   in   feeling's   dull 

decay    *    *    * 

That  heavy  chill  has  frozen  o'er  the  fountain  of  our  tears, 
And   though   the   eye   may   sparkle   still,   'tis   where   the   ice 

appears. 

Ohio   Brewers   are   Following   the   Lead   of   Their 
Texas  Brethren. 

It  is  cause  for  congratulation  that,  notwithstanding 
the  severe  criticism  of  the  Texas  brewers  by  the  liquor 
publications,  the  Ohio  brewers  at  their  recent  conven- 
tion, after  receiving  a  report  from  a  committee  sent 
to  investigate  the  working  of  the  Texas  plan,  instruct- 
ed their  executive  board  at  once  to  establish  a  bureau 
for  the  purpose,  among  others,  of  looking  up  reports 
of  disorderly  saloons  and,  where  appeal  to  the  proper 
authorities  failed  to  bring  about  reform,  proceeding 
against  the  offenders  and  stopping  the  conduct  of  such 
places. 

If  I  have  any  criticism  to  offer  upon  this  action  it  is 
only  that  it  has  been  so  long  coming.  The  brewers 
have  for  years  been  passing  resolutions  denouncing 
the  disorderly  retail  stands,  and  now  that  the  public 
has  about  lost  faith  in  their  sincerity  in  that  regard, 
they  set  about  to  show  their  earnestness.  Well,  let  us 
hope  it  is  not  too  late  to  effect  a  real  clean-up  and  to 
convince  the  public  that  they  mean  business.  And, 
an  important  element  will  be  not  only  to  clean  up 
once,  but  to  keep  your  house  clean  forever  after. 

It  is  true — and  that  is  one  of  the  criticisms  of  this 
course  of  action  on  the  part  of  brewers — that  by  pro- 
ceeding in  this  way  the  brewers  are  doing  what  the 
public  prosecutors  or  the  police  ought  to  do.  But, 
would  they  do  it,  if  the  police  or  other  officials  were 

123 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

not  remiss  in  their  duty?  And  if  the  public  officials 
are  negligent,  who  gets  the  blame?  The  brewer!  It 
is  going  beyond  the  limits  of  ordinary  business  and 
assuming  a  responsibility  far  beyond  that  of  other 
business  men,  as  if,  for  instance,  as  I  showed  some 
time  ago,  a  dry  goods  dealer  should  refuse  to  sell 
goods  to  a  dressmaker  who  made  clothes  for  ladies  of 
the  half-world.  But  the  brewer  occupies  an  exceptional 
position,  and  while  there  is,  perhaps,  no  moral  obli- 
gation on  his  part  to  see  that  his  goods  are  not  put 
to  bad  uses  after  he  has  sold  them,  nevertheless,  it  is 
really  a  matter  of  self-protection  to  keep  the  retail 
business  clean. 

Roosevelt's  Crime  of  Drinking  a  Glass  of  Cham- 
pagne at  St.  Louis. 

President  Roosevelt  drank  a  glass  of  champagne  at 
a  luncheon  given  in  his  honor  at  St.  Louis  last  month. 
Large  amounts  of  telegraph  toll  were  paid  by  the 
newspapers  of  this  country  in  publishing  lengthy  dis- 
patches describing  this  event.  A  great  many  pulpits 
the  following  Sunday  rang  with  denunciations  of  his 
act,  numerous  interviews  were  published,  editorials 
written,  and  altogether  an  awful  rumpus  was  raised. 

The  fateful  act  is  described  as  follows: 

There  was  a  tense  moment  at  the  Jefferson  Hotel,  St. 
Louis,  luncheon  when  it  was  put  up  to  President  Roosevelt 
to  drink  his  champagne  or  respond  to  a  dry  toast. 

President  Smith  of  the  Business  Men's  League,  holding 
a  glass  of  champagne  above  his  head,  said :  "Gentlemen,  I 
pledge  you  the  President  of  the  United  States." 

All  except  the  President  rose  to  their  feet  and  quaffed  the 
wine. 

When  they  resumed  their  seats  the  President  arose,  he 
reached  out  and  grasped  his  well-filled  glass,  and  brought 
it  close  to  his  lips.  Then,  smiling  quizzically,  put  it  back 
on  the  table  and  sat  "down. 

There  was  a  murmur  of  applause,  and  several  who  had 
124 


Morbid  Public  Sentiment. 

left  their  glasses  turned  down  said  aloud :  "He  isn't  going 
to  drink  it." 

Instantly  the  President  rose  to  his  feet  again  and  lifted 
the  glass. 

A  second  time  it  approached  his  lips,  but  this  time  it 
did  not  stop.  He  took  a  sip  of  the  wine  and  held  the  glass 
poised.  There  was  a  burst  of  applause.  This  time  his  face 
broke  into  a  broad  grin,  and,  bowing  to  President  Smith, 
with  one  gulp  drained  his  glass. 

Then  he  looked  around  the  table  as  though  defying  a 
challenge.  There  was  none.  Instead  there  was  a  burst  of 
applause  fairly  deafening,  in  which  the  ministers  present 
joined. 

Putting  his  empty  glass  back  on  the  table,  the  President 
said: 

"I  want  to  thank  you  heartily  for  this  splendid  reception, 
and  through  you  I  want  to  thank  your  great  State." 

Then,  turning  to  Mr.  Smith,  he  said : 

"I  want  to  propose  a  toast  to  the  Business  Men's  League 
and  to  express  the  wish  that  its  ends  may  be  achieved." 

The  toast  was   drunk  standing,   the   President  joining. 

Gov.  Folk  drank  all  the  toasts  that  were  proposed. 

The  Fuss  Raised  Over  Roosevelt's  Drink  Demon- 
strates the  Morbid  State  of  Public  Sentiment. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  argue  the  case  or  to  throw 
bouquets  at  Roosevelt.  What  strikes  me  as  noteworthy 
and  symptomatic  of  conditions  is,  not  the  fact  that 
Roosevelt  drank  champagne  or  that  a  toast  to  the  pres- 
ident of  the  United  States  was  drunk  in  champagne — 
think  of  drinking  a  toast  to  the  president  of  the  United 
States  in  ice  water! — but  the  fact  that  this  circum- 
stance was  considered  of  sufficient  news  value  to  pay 
telegraph  tolls  on  lengthy  dispatches  about  it,  and  to 
feature  it  on  the  first  pages  of  a  number  of  newspapers. 
Furthermore,  the  fact  that  the  president  was  practically 
challenged  to  do  this  thing  as  if  it  was  something  out 
of  the  way. 

These  are  the  facts  that  indicate  the  diseased  condi- 
tion of  public  opinion.  If  public  opinion  on  the  drink 

125 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

question  were  healthy,  there  would  have  been  no  news 
item  in  this  commonplace  incident,  it  would  have  been 
considered  perfectly  natural  and  therefore  not  worthy' 
of  comment — which  it  really  was  not — that  the  health 
of  the  representative  of  the  Nation's  sovereignty  was 
drunk  in  what  is  popularly  considered  the  sovereign 
of  drinks.  Unto  the  pure,  all  things  are  pure,  while  to 
the  prurient  prude  there  is  much  nastiness.  Where 
the  healthy  mind  will  see  in  a  picture  a  beautiful 
woman,  the  morbid  mind  will  see  an  undressed  fe- 
male. 

Such  is  the  state  of  public  opinion,  or  rather  senti- 
ment, on  the  drink  question,  and  until  that  sentiment  is 
rendered  wholesome,  the  brewer  will  have  a  constant 
fight  on  his  hands  against  tremendous  odds.  At  the 
same  time,  there  is  no  other  effective  remedy  than  to 
attack  and  try  to  correct  public  sentiment.  And  this 
can  be  done  only  by  a  fearless,  aggressive,  positive 
campaign,  on  lines  in  agreement  with  modern  science 
and  with  the  ideals  of  a  higher  culture  than  the  me- 
dieval one  on  which  the  anti-alcoholist  rests  his  argu- 
ments. 

And,  say,  did  you  notice,  away  down  at  the  end  of 
the  report,  the  little  note  that  "Governor  Folk  drank 
all  the  toasts  that  were  proposed?" 

In  ice  water? 

Nay!  Nay! 

Morality  is  the  Child  of  Happiness,  Not  of  Misery. 

The  history  of  morality  shows  clearly  that  it  is  not 
poverty,  privation,  austerity,  barrenness  of  life  that  has 
developed  moral  ideas.  Morality  is  the  fruition  of 
happiness.  The  man  who  has  dined  is  at  peace  with 
the  world,  the  man  with  the  full  dinner  pail  goes  sing- 
ing or  whistling  to  his  work.  Clean  streets  make  good 
citizens.  Smoke  makes  murderers,  said  Dr.  W.  T. 

126 


Morality  the  Child  of  Happiness. 

Talbot,  of  New  Hampshire,  recently  in  a  meeting  of 
the  Pennsylvania  Homoeopathists  state  convention  at 
Pittsburg.  He  said  in  the  course  of  his  remarks : 

As  a  city-bred  boy  I  realize  the  difficulties  confronting  us 
in  keeping  contamination  from  the  urban  atmosphere,  but 
you  have  little  idea,  perhaps,  of  the  horrible  oppression, 
mentally  and  physically,  suffered  by  one  coming  from  the 
New  England  hills  to  the  smoke-burdened  manufacturing 
cities.  The  economic  waste  of  adolescence  in  such  a  city 
as  Pittsburg,  in  depressing  proper  growth  of  children,  is 
so  closely  connected  with  moral  obliquities  that  it  is  safe  to 
lay  the  vice  and  crime  of  city  children  largely  to  the  in- 
fluence of  sewers,  gas  mains  and  belching  chimneys.  Every 
manufacturer  and  railway  director  who  allows  his  chimneys 
and  locomotives  to  vomit  forth  volumes  of  smoke  is  re- 
sponsible in  as  large  degree  for  the  depression  of  vitality 
which  leads  to  suicide,  larceny,  robbery  and  even  murder  as 
though  he  incited  it  directly. 

A  meal  enjoyed  "sets"  well  on  the  stomach.  A 
hearty  laugh  has  cured  many  a  case  of  dyspepsia. 
Happiness  begets  good  habits,  and  morality  is  habit. 
The  savage  killed  the  other  man  whose  goods  he 
coveted.  After  a  while  he  found  it  more  profitable 
to  let  him  live  and  trade  with  him.  Thus  developed 
the  "golden  rule,"  considered  today  the  supreme  moral 
law.  Every  educator  knows  how  much  easier  it  is  to 
make  children  good  by  keeping  them  happy  and  busy 
than  by  keeping  the  rod  in  view. 

He  who  would  destroy  the  joy  of  living  and  the 
comforts,  cleanliness  and  general  wholesomeness  of 
life,  is  the  greatest  enemy  of  morality,  public  and 
private.  His  work  is  truly  satanic. 

E.  H.  Harriman  gives  much  money  and  time  to  a 
boys'  club  in  New  York  which  was  recently  described 
in  the  Chicago  Record-Herald  by  Wm.  E.  Curtis. 
The  manager  of  the  club  expressed  his  opinion  that 
recreation  was  the  most  important  element  in  form- 

127 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

ing  character,   which   is  putting  in  a   little   different 
form  what  I  endeavored  to  state  above. 

Temperance  Especially  is  a  Product  of  the  Evolu- 
tion of  Higher  Culture. 

Temperance  is  that  virtue  above  all  others  to  which 
all  this  applies  most  pointedly.  It  is  the  virtue  typical 
of  civilized  man,  the  man  who  has  acquired  comfort 
and  ease,  as  compared  with  the  barbarian.  Intemper- 
ance is  the  typical  besetting  sin  of  the  barbarian  and 
the  savage.  The  heroes  of  the  Homeric  poems  were 
wonderful  eaters  and  drinkers,  but  the  Greek  of  the 
classical  period  ate  temperately,  especially  of  meat, 
and  drank  much  less  than  his  ancestors.  Thor,  the 
ideal  of  the  northern  Teuton,  on  one  occasion  ate  all 
that  was  intended  for  an  'entire  wedding  feast,  and 
another  time  ate  two  whole  oxen  at  one  sitting,  wash- 
ing down  the  repast  with  generous  quantities  of  ale, 
and  so  scared  his  host  that  next  day  they  went  out  and 
caught  two  whales  for  dinner.  It  is  not  so  very  long 
ago  that  it  was  the  proper  thing  at  a  dinner  party  to 
become  "drunk  as  a  lord,"  and  among  primitive  people, 
even  in  our  own  midst,  to  be  a  "hearty  eater"  is  an  ac- 
complishment. It  is  one  of  the  ideals  of  the  human 
mind  on  lower  levels  of  culture. 

Perhaps,  it  is  that  familiarity  breeds  contempt,  or 
that  where  there  is  plenty  there  is  less  desire.  What 
ever  the  cause,  the  fact  is  that  temperance  has  grown 
with  the  improvement  of  material  environment  and 
with  the  greater  comfort  and  happiness  of  life.  For, 
let  us  give  up  once  for  all  the  old  legend  about  the 
greater  happiness  and  health  of  primitive  man.  That 
is  a  nursery  tale. 

128 


A  Nation  of  Sneaks? 

Are   We   Going   to   be   Turned   Into   a   Nation   of 
Sneaks? 

Efforts  are  to  be  made  at  the  coming  session  of  Con- 
gress not  only  to  force  through  the  Littlefield  bill,  or 
a  similar  one,  placing  interstate  shipments  of  liquor 
under  state  control;  to  forbid  the  issuing  of  liquor 
dealers'  tax  stamps  in  "dry"  states  and  districts,  and 
other  measures  aimed  at  the  liquor  traffic,  but  also  to 
make  the  District  of  Columbia  itself  dry.  And  the 
possibility  of  such  an  enormity  is  discussed  quite  seri- 
ously in  the  papers  by  the  Washington  correspondents. 

In  a  letter  on  this  subject  in  the  Chicago  Record- 
Herald,  the  following  passage  is  found : 

Whether  prohibition  at  the  national  capital  would  pro- 
hibit is  the  same  mooted  question  as  in  other  parts  of  the 
country.  There  is  a  sort  of  prohibition  at  the  capitol  build- 
ing itself  now,  but  it  doesn't  prohibit.  When  the  canteen 
was  abolished  the  lawmakers  generously — at  least  willingly — 
did  away  with  the  sale  of  alcoholic  drinks  in  the  Senate 
and  House  restaurants. 

Now  there  is  no  liquor  of  any  kind  to  be  had  in  the 
restaurants,  but  congressional  tippling  has  been  transferred 
to  the  committee-rooms.  The  genial  committee  chairman 
has  his  own  little  buffet,  where  he  takes  his  nip  and  en- 
tertains his  friends.  The  change  from  open  selling  in  the 
cafes  to  the  quiet  trading  in  the  committee-rooms  also  has 
developed  some  expert  cocktail  mixers  among  the  congress- 
men; and  if  a  committee  chairman  of  convivial  habits  does 
not  do  his  own  mixing  the  colored  gentleman  who  acts  as 
janitor  must  embrace  the  art  among  the  qualities  fitting  him 
for  his  job. 

Is  it  possible  to  imagine  anything  more  demoraliz- 
ing and  disgraceful?  Imagine  the  National  legisla- 
ture deliberately  passing  a  law  to  prohibit  liquor  sell- 
ing in  the  restaurants  of  the  capitol,  and  then  estab- 
lishing a  lot  of  private  bars  in  their  committee  rooms ! 

And  we  claim  to  be  a  nation  of  virility,  of  courage, 
of  convictions ! 

If  this  keeps  up  we  shall  be  a  nation  of  sneaks ! 
129 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

(December  i,  1907.) 
True  Modesty  and  True  Temperance  Are  Similar. 

"True  modesty  lies  in  the  entire  absence  of  thought 
upon  the  subject,"  says  T.  H.  LEWIN,  in  Wild  Races 
of  Southeastern  India,  in  discussing  the  origin  of  the 
feeling  of  modesty  or  shame.  "Among  medical  stu- 
dents and  artists,"  says  EDWARD  WESTERMARCK  in  His- 
tory of  Human  Marriage,  "the  nude  causes  no  extra- 
ordinary emotion ;  indeed ;  FLAXMAN  asserted  that  the 
students  in  entering  the  academy  seem  to  hang  up 
their  passions  along  with  their  hats." 

"Only  that  which  is  concealed  excites,"  says  W.  F. 
A.  ZIMMERMAN  in  Die  Inseln  des  indischen  und  stillen 
Meeres,  "and  those  who  introduced  in  the  Society 
Islands  the  covering  dress  and  secret  indulgence  and 
concealment  of  the  natural  feelings,  have  certainly 
not  improved  the  morals." 

"When  the  sight  becomes  accustomed  to  the  ab- 
sence of  raiment,"  say  HENRY  ROWLEY,  in  Africa  Un- 
veiled, "your  sense  of  propriety  is  far  less  offended 
than  in  England,  where  ample  clothing  is  made  the 
vehicle  for  asserting  defiance,  if  not  of  actual  law, 
yet  of  the  wishes  and  feelings  of  the  more  virtuous  part 
of  the  community." 

"More  harm,  I  think,  is  done,"  says  W.  PARKER 
SNOW,  in  A  Two  Years'  Cruise  off  Tier  Y a  del  Fuego, 
"by  false  modesty — by  covering  and  partly  clothing, 
than  by  the  truth  in  nature  always  appearing  as  it  is. 
Intermingling  with  savages  of  wild  lands  who  do 
not  clothe,  gives  one,  I  believe,  less  impure  and  sensual 
feelings  than  the  merely  mixing  with  society  of  a 
higher  kind." 

"Where  all  men  go  naked,"  says  G.  FORSTER  in 
A  Voyage  Round  the  World,  "as  for  instance,  in  New 
Holland,  custom  familiarizes  them  to  each  other's 

130 


Modesty  and  Temperance. 

eyes  as  much  as  if  they  went  wholly  wrapped  in  gar- 
ments." 

"There  is  nothing  voluptuous/'  says  W.  WINWOOD 
READE  in  Savage  Africa,  "in  the  excessive  deshabille 
of  an  equatorial  girl,  nothing  being  so  moral  and  so 
unlikely  to  excite  the  passions  as  nakedness." 

Speaking  of  the  naked  women  of  New  Ireland,  Dr. 
ZIMMERMANN  (above  quoted)  says:  "Indeed,  I  must 
say  that  after  a  short  time,  after  an  habituation  which 
is  by  no  means  long,  one  finds  nothing  objectionable 
in  this  total  absence  of  clothing.  I  have  often  noticed 
that  the  dress  of  a  (European)  lady  which  was  not 
cut  according  to  the  prevailing  style,  attracted  my  no- 
tice more  strongly  than  did  the  entire  absence  of  cloth- 
ing in  the  inhabitants  of  the  tropical  islands.  It  should 
be  added  that  these  people  give  the  observer  no  cause 
whatever  to  think  of  anything  improper.  A  European 
woman,  if  left  on  one  of  these  happy  islands  and  de- 
prived of  her  clothes,  would,  even  after  many  years' 
sojourn  in  such  regions  place  her  hands  before  her 
breast  or  other  parts  and  by  this  very  desire  to  con- 
ceal would  attract  attention  to  that  which  she  tried 
to  hide." 

These  are  a  few  citations  showing  what  practically 
all  trained  observers  report. 

What  is  true  concerning  sexual  morality  applies 
equally  to  the  morality  of  eating  and  drinking  and  to 
almost  all  other  departments  of  morals.  If  true  mod- 
esty lies  in  the  absence  of  all  thought  upon  the  subject, 
true  temperance  lies  in  the  practice  of  using  the  good 
things  of  the  world  within  proper  limits  without  any 
conscious  self-restraint.  Such  a  condition  of  mind 
and  character  is  the  result  of  habit  and  training. 
The  person  habituated  to  the  temperate  use  of  things 
will  not,  unless  he  is  afflicted  with  a  defective  con- 

131 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

stitution  as  the  result  of  degeneracy  or  unfortunate 
environment,  feel  any  inclination  to  go  to  excess. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  person  who  has  been  brought 
up  to  look  upon  the  use  of  any  of  the  good  things  of 
the  world  as  improper,  while  knowing  or  at  least  sus- 
pecting that  they  are  enjoyable,  will  be  constantly  under 
an  artificial  restraint,  his  nature  will  be  stunted  in 
some  way,  and  if  he  does  taste  of  the  forbidden  joy  he 
is  extremely  likely  to  go  to  excess  and,  his  whole  nature 
being  out  of  proper  balance,  to  become  a  ready  candi- 
date for  the  hospital,  the  jail,  or  the  asylum.  It  was 
Bluebeard's  prohibition  from  opening  a  certain  cham- 
ber that  created  the  irresistible  desire  to  look  in,  as  we 
all  learned  when  we  read  the  Arabian  Nights.  As  Dr. 
Zimmermann  says,  the  desire  to  conceal  serves  only  to 
attract  attention. 

But  that  is  not  all.  While  stimulating  desire  and 
attracting  attention  to  the  object  of  desire,  the  en- 
forced abstinence  from  it  also  impairs  the  power  of 
resistance  to  it.  The  stunted  nature  is  thrown  out 
of  balance,  and  thus  prepared  for  more  ready  moral 
decline  and  failure.  Unbalanced,  inharmonious  devel- 
opment is  the  surest  road  to  mental  and  moral  in- 
capacity. The  greatest  specialists  are  those  who  build 
their  specialties  upon  a  foundation  of  general  harmon- 
ious education.  The  specialist  who  knows  nothing  but 
his  specialty  as  a  rule  amounts  to  little  and  preserves 
through  life  a  distorted  view  of  things,  having  never 
acquired  a  proper  sense  of  proportion. 

It  is  axiomatic  that  to  protect  one  from  injurious 
influence  by  the  weather  one  must  be  hardened  to  such 
influence.  A  hot-house  plant  or  a  hot-house  child  will 
not  be  able  to  resist  the  cold  of  winter  or  the  moisture 
of  rain  and  mist.  Likewise,  to  remove  everything  that 
will  call  for  exertion  from  a  person's  path  will  weaken 

132 


Tendency  to  Coddle. 


the  nerves  and  muscles  and  prevent  the  development 
of  moral  stamina.  The  result  is  a  spoiled  child,  the 
worst  contribution  to  society  that  a  citizen  can  make. 

Let   Us   Not    Make   Mollycoddles   Out  of  all   the 
People. 

Yet,  there  seems  to  be  a  disposition  to  make  spoiled, 
nerveless  children  of  all  of  us.  If  anybody  does  any- 
thing wrong,  we  do  not  try  to  strengthen  the  person, 
but  to  remove  the  object  over  which  he  stumbled. 
The  spirit  which  is  back  of  the  principle  of  prohibition 
as  to  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink  crops  out  in  many  other 
places. 

A  short  time  ago  a  certain  Italian  singer  less  prom- 
inent than  his  countryman  Caruso,  was  arrested  in  the 
monkey  house  in  Central  Park  in  New  York  City  on 
charges  similar  to  those  which  brought  unenviable 
notoriety  upon  his  more  famous  compatriot.  A  few 
days  after  the  event,  a  big  newspaper  had  an  editorial 
paragraph  saying  that  "New  York  might  do  worse 
than  abolish  its  monkey  house  altogether." 

You  see,  it  was  the  fault  of  the  monkey  house! 

A  few  days  afterwards  a  well  known  Chicagoan 
who  had  been  mixed  up  in  a  divorce  case,  said  it  was 
due  to  his  automobile. 

Of  course,  it  was  the  fault  of  the  automobile,  not 
of  its  owner  or  user ! 

Within  a  few  days  more,  a  clergyman  declared  that 
skating  rinks  were  worse  than  public  dance  halls  in 
endangering  the  safety  of  girls. 

Of  course,  it  was  the  fault  of  the  skating  rink ! 

When  the  bicycle  craze  was  at  its  height,  there  were 
people  who  opposed  the  use  of  bicycles  because  it  was 
dangerous  to  have  boys  and  girls  go  out  riding  to- 
gether. 

Of  course,  it  was  the  fault  of  the  bicycle! 
133 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much!9 

Therefore,  the  prohibitionist  would  argue,  away  with 
zoological  gardens,  automobiles,  skating  rinks,  bicycles ! 
The  only  safe  thing  for  a  person  to  do  is  to  sit  at 
home  and  twirl  his  thumbs.  Perhaps  even  that  is 
too  much  activity.  He  might  twist  his  thumbs  out  of 
joint. 

I  know  the  anti-drink  "fans"  do  not  think  highly 
of  President  Roosevelt,  but  I  confess  I  prefer  his 
doctrine  of  the  "strenuous  life"  to  the  mollycoddle 
teachings  of  the  antis.  I  am  even  glad  to  learn  that 
the  W.  C.  T.  U.  denied  that  he  sent  them  a  telegram 
of  congratulation  on  the  success  of  the  prohibition 
movement  in  Oklahoma.  The  report  that  he  sent  such 
a  telegram  seemed  incredible  anyway.  For  Roose- 
velt is  a  man  of  action,  and  as  such  his  principles  are 
necessarily  opposed  to  those  who  believe  in  making 
people  good  by  compelling  them  to  do  nothing. 

The  Alcohol  Question  is  Above  all  Things  a  Great 
Moral  Question. 

The  more  I  think  about  the  alcohol  question  the 
stronger  does  the  conviction  become  that  it  is,  above 
all  other  things,  a  great  moral  question.  And  I  can- 
not refrain  from  saying  again  to  the  brewers  that  the 
most  important  part  of  the  work  before  them  is  to 
attack  the  anti-drink  forces  on  the  moral  side.  When- 
ever you  get  into  a  discussion  of  the  question  you  find 
that  the  person  on  the  other  side  proceeds  upon  the 
basis  that  those  who  oppose  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink 
represent  a  higher  moral  standpoint,  and  that  those 
who  defend  such  use  are  merely  apologizing  for  the 
indulgence  of  a  more  or  less  improper  carnal  ap- 
petite. If  you  allow  the  discussion  to  proceed  under 
such  conditions  you  have  conceded  the  most  import- 
ant point  in  the  controversy  and  placed  yourself  at  a 
disadvantage  which  no  subsequent  argument  can  over- 

134 


A  Great  Moral  Question. 

come.  The  first  and  most  important  step  in  the  en- 
tire argument  is  to  deny  absolutely  the  claim  of  the 
anti-alcoholists  to  that  moral  superiority  which  they 
assume;  to  show,  in  fact,  that  so  far  from  being 
superior,  their  standpoint  is  decidedly  inferior,  medie- 
val, a  survival  of  a  lower  culture.  We  who  stand  for 
temperance  not  only  in  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink,  but 
of  all  things,  are  defending  a  far  higher  moral  stand- 
point than  those  who  would  compel  all  men  to  move 
into  hot-houses  in  order  to  save  a  few  unfortunate  de- 
fectives. There  are  other  viewpoints  from  which  the 
drink  question  must  be  discussed,  and  they  all  have 
their  measure  of  importance.  But  it  is  the  moral,  the 
social,  and  the  psycho-physiological  viewpoints  upon 
which  the  matter  will  be  in  the  main  decided. 

The  idea  of  modern  education  is  to  do  away  with 
the  old  medieval  practice  of  suppression  rather  than 
development.  The  educator  of  old  was  continually 
saying  "don't/'  The  educator  of  today  says  "do!" 
and  proceeds  to*  give  his  pupils  the  right  things  to  do. 
The  rod  is  no  longer  prominently  displayed.  On  the 
contrary,  it  is  believed  that  the  school  teacher  who  can- 
not get  along  without  corporal  punishment  is  out  of 
date  and  should  be  retired. 

This  principle  is  making  headway  in  other  depart- 
ments of  thought  and  even  in  matters  of  government. 
I  was  interested  in  finding  in  an  article  in  Collier's 
for  November  30,  describing  the  fight  of  Gifford  Pin- 
chot,  head  of  the  U.  S.  Forest  Service  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  National  forests,  the  following  paragraph : 

In  the  old  days  the  signboards  on  the  forest  reserves 
emphasized  the  penalty  for  starting  forest  fires  as  well  as 
for  stealing  timber.  But  the  offender  was  in  no  danger 
of  being  caught  in  the  wilderness,  and  he  knew  it.  The 
black-letter  headline  of  the  present  signboard  is  Caution 
instead  of  Fine.  It  aims  to  make  the  reader  realize  that 
it  is  his  own  forest  which  he  may  destroy  if  he  leaves  a 

135 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much.3' 

camp-fire    smoldering    or    throws    a   lighted    match    into    dry 
grass. 

But  when  it  comes  to  approaching  the  liquor  ques- 
tion, Collier's  leaves  its  reason  behind  and  acts  upon 
prejudice.  Most  people  seem  utterly  unable  to  think 
straight  when  the  drink  question  is  involved. 

The  Barbarism  and   Paganism    of    Anti-Drink 
Agitation. 

If  properly  approached,  it  ought  not  to  be  difficult 
to  convince  the  ordinary  intelligent  person  that  the 
demand  for  the  suppression  of  the  liquor  traffic  and 
of  the  public  vending  places  for  liquor  implies  a 
reactionary  tendency,  a  gravitation  towards  a  lower 
level  of  culture. 

When  the  savage  or  the  barbarian,  in  consequence 
of  his  unwholesome  manner  of  living,  fell  ill,  he  was 
believed  to  be  possessed  by  a  demon,  and  the  medicine 
man  or  shaman  was  called  to  exercise  and  cast  out 
the  demon.  Where  modern  man  sees  but  the  results 
of  the  patient's  own  misstep,  the  primitive  mind  laid 
it  to  some  outside  power  which  man  could  not  resist. 

This  paganism  or  barbaric  form  of  thought  still 
survives  in  many  instances.  And  we  hear  many  people 
who  claim  to  be  Christians  and  to  have  emerged  en- 
tirely from  paganism,  speak  of  the  "Demon  Rum" 
or  the  "Drink  Devil."  They  represent  it  as  an  unholy 
force,  external  and  hostile  to  man,  from  which  it  is 
necessary  to  rescue  and  protect  us. 

Did  you  ever  see  a  fond  mother  pick  up  her  baby 
which,  toddling  with  uncertain  steps,  had  stumbled 
against  a  chair  and  fallen  and  hurt  itself,  and  take 
a  stick  and  hit  the  "naughty"  chair  for  hurting  the 
dear  little  baby  ? 

136 


Barbaric  and  Pagan  Views. 

Will  it  help  baby  to  see  such  action?  Would  not 
baby  be  safer  if  it  was  told  to  use  its  eyes  the  next 
time? 

The  prohibitionist  will  answer  it  is  but  a  figure  of 
speech  when  he  declaims  against  the  "Demon  Rum." 
But  it  is  not !  He  may  not  himself,  nor  desire  his 
audience  to,  fancy  the  figure  of  a  black  demon  with  a 
tail,  a  cloven  hoof  and  a  pair  of  horns.  But  he  retains 
the  kernel  of  the  primitive  conception,  the  idea  that  it 
is  a  power  external  and  hostile  to  man.  He  proposes 
to  whip  the  chair  instead  of  telling  baby  to  use  its 
eyes.  He  wants  to  kill  the  devil,  to  do  away  with  the 
monster  that  threatens  him  and  his  hearers.  He 
coddles  the  criminal  who  tells  him  it  was  drink  that 
ruined  him. 

Will  he  tell  the  thieving  bank  cashier  it  was  the 
gold  that  seduced  him?  Many  men  have  fallen  on  ac- 
count of  it.  It  must  be  a  demon.  The  man  is  not  to 
be  blamed. 

Views  of  a  Liberal  Churchman  on  the  Anti-Saloon 
Fight. 

As  against  this  barbaric  view  of  the  drink  question 
it  is  refreshing  to  find  utterances  from  clergymen  who 
take  the  modern,  civilized,  truly  moral,  and,  to  my 
mind,  religious  view  of  the  matter,  as  did  Selden  P. 
Delaney,  dean  of  All  Saints  Cathedral  in  Milwaukee, 
in  a  recent  editorial  sermon  in  the  Evening  Wisconsin. 
In  answer  to  the  question,  "What  attitude  ought  the 
Christian  to  take  toward  this  war  on  the  saloon?" 
he  says,  among  other  very  sensible  things,  that  some 
saloons  are  not  dangerous,  and  some  are,  but  "the 
latter  are  dangerous,  not  because  they  sell  alcoholic 
drinks,  but  because  they  are  run  by  unscrupulous  men, 
and  supported  by  the  vicious  classes,  who  use  them  as 

137 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

places  where  they  may  carry  on  their  dastardly  work 
in  secret." 

As  to  the  proposition,  to  close  all  the  saloons  in 
order  to  get  rid  of  the  dangerous  ones,  he  says  it  is 
like  using  a  sledge  hammer  to  drive  a  tack  into  the 
wall. 

His  final  answer  to  his  question  in  this :  "The  duty 
of  the  Christian  is  clear.  He  ought  to  take  an  in- 
telligent and  enthusiastic  part  in  the  movement  to 
regulate  the  liquor  traffic,  and  to  keep  it  within  the 
bounds  of  decency  and  moderation.  He  can  best  do 
this  by  trying  to  confine  the  attack  to  the  dangerous 
saloons." 

To  all  of  which  we  say  "Amen  I" 

The  Anti-Saloon  Fight  is  a  Reactionary  Class  Move- 
ment. 

The  fight  of  the  anti-saloon  men  is  not  only  bar- 
barism. It  is  reactionary  also  because  it  is  a  class 
movement.  It  is  an  attempt  to  array  the  well-to-do 
against  the  poorer  people.  The  anti-saloonist  does  not, 
at  present,  work  to  prohibit  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink 
entirely.  What  he  is  fighting  is  the  saloon.  He  ap- 
parently is  willing,  for  the  present,  at  least,  that  the 
well-to-do  should  have  their  drink  in  their  clubs  or 
in  their  homes,  but  the  poor  man  who  has  no  club  and 
who  cannot  afford  to  buy  supplies  in  quantity  must  be 
shut  off  from  its  use.  The  man  who  buys  his  coal 
by  the  ton  may  buy  wine  or  beer  by  the  case  or  whisky 
by  the  gallon  or  bottle.  But  the  man  who  buys  his 
coal  by  the  bushel  must  not  buy  beer  by  the  glass. 

It  is  always  an  unpleasant  thing  to  pose  as  the 
"workingman's  friend/'  Whenever  one  undertakes  to 
do  so,  one  is  at  once  under  suspicion  of  insincerity. 
The  well-to-do  suspect  him  of  ulterior  motives,  and 
the  workingman  himself  resents  the  patronizing  air 

138 


Reactionary  Class  Movement. 

of  his  self-constituted  "friend."  But  if  there  ever 
was  a  case  where  the  attitude  was  justified  it  is  the 
present.  Nothing  is  clearer  than  that  the  restriction  of 
saloons,  the  Sunday  closing,  shorter  hours  on  week 
days,  etc.,  have  not,  while  saloons  are  allowed,  tended 
to  diminish  the  consumption  of  beer.  The  increase  of 
beer  production  for  the  last  year  is  close  to  four  mil- 
lion barrels,  and  for  the  preceding  year  it  was  over  five 
million.  About  one-fourth  of  this  amount  goes  into 
bottles,  and  the  bulk  of  the  bottle  beer  goes  to  private 
houses,  clubs  and  hotels.  This  shows  that  as  long  as 
there  is  beer  to  be  had,  those  who  can  afford  to  buy 
in  quantity  will  have  it  in  bottled  form.  If  the  saloons 
were  closed,  they  would  not  suffer  greatly.  Those 
who  cannot  or  do  not  buy  in  quantity  would  be  the 
sufferers.  In  defending  the  saloon,  therefore,  the 
brewer  is  not  waging  an  altogether  selfish  fight.  He  is 
defending  the  comfort,  the  joy  of  living  to  which  the 
masses  are  entitled  not  only  in  the  same,  but  perhaps 
in  greater  measure  than  the  well-to-do  classes,  for  the 
latter  have  more  opportunity  for  enjoyment  anyway. 

The  jests  of  anti-saloon  orators  and  publishers  and 
of  the  daily  press  about  the  saloon  as  the  poor  man's 
club  appear  inane  and  senseless  as  against  the  fact 
that  all  students  of  the  liquor  problem  are  agreed  on 
this  point  that  the  saloon  supplies  the  social  wants  of 
the  masses  better  than  any  other  institution.  Such  is 
the  unanimous  verdict  of  all  honest  investigators, 
sociologists,  settlement  workers,  or  whatever  the  form 
in  which  they  have  come  into  contact  with  the  prob- 
lem. If  our  newspapers  were  better  informed  on  the 
subject — which  they  should  be  if  the  brewers  had  put 
the  information  within  easy  reach  by  a  comprehensive 
campaign  of  publicity — we  should  not  find  cartoons 
and  funny  paragraphs  to  ridicule  the  idea  of  the  poor 
man's  club. 

139 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

I  am  not  fond  of  using  the  catchwords  that  have 
been  coined  in  certain  quarters,  but  it  does  seem  that 
the  anti-saloon  movement  is  well  characterized  as  a 
fight  of  the  "classes  against  the  masses."  That  this 
is  felt  by  the  people  at  whom,  individually,  the  fight 
is  aimed,  is  well  illustrated  by  an  article  reprinted 
elsewhere  in  this  issue  from  the  Labor  World,  of 
Pittsburg.  In  the  course  of  that  aricle  it  is  said  that 
"local  option  is,  indeed,  a  workingman's  question." 
"The  principle  that  underlies  local  option,"  says  the 
writer,  "is  exactly  the  principle  against  which  organ- 
ized labor  has  been  most  desperately  fighting  since 
long  before  the  eighteenth  century.  It  is,  therefore, 
quite  correct  to  say  that  trade  unionism  is  not  com- 
patible with  the  principle  of  local  option,  for  the  aim 
of  the  latter  is  to  prevent  a  citizen  or  several  citizens 
from  exercising  a  personal  inherent  right,  the  exercis- 
ing of  which  only  concerns  his  or  their  own  personal 
tastes." 

The  assumption  of  the  anti-saloonists  to  act  as 
guardians  of  the  morals  of  the  American  workingman 
is  indignantly  rebuked  in  the  same  article,  the  writer 
of  which  shows  a  better  understanding  of  the  nature 
of  the  problem  than  the  anti-saloonists  when  speaking 
of  the  "infinitesimal  minority"  who  abuse  the  right  to 
indulge  in  alcoholic  drink,  he  says:  "This  small  mi- 
nority would  be  drunkards  under  any  conditions, 
prohibition  or  otherwise.  *  *  *  They  simply  live 
to  debauch  in  some  shape  or  form.  Labor  as  a  whole 
most  certainly  does  not  want  the  general  community 
to  be  fettered  and  shackled  because  of  these  few  men." 

By  Insisting  on  Abstinence  Employers  Will  Get 
Inferior  Workmen. 

It  is  being  more  commonly  claimed  nowadays  that 
the  anti-drink  movement  of  today  is  no  longer  an 

140 


Winnowing  Out  the  Inferiors. 

emotional  affair,  but  based  on  economic  grounds,  and 
that  employers  of  labor  insist  on  abstinence  among  their 
employes.  The  word  "abstinence"  is  not  used.  Gen- 
erally the  word  "sobriety"  or  some  synonym  occurs. 
But  the  impression  is  sought  to  be  conveyed  that 
abstinence  is  meant.  If  this  is  the  case,  it  were  time 
the  working  people  pulled  themselves  together  and  took 
action  in  regard  to  the  matter. 

That  employers  have  a  right  to  demand  sobriety 
on  the  part  of  their  employes  will  not  be  denied.  But 
sobriety  does  not  mean  total  abstinence.  And  what- 
ever else  may  be  granted,  no  workingman  ought  to 
allow  his  actions  to  be  arbitrarily  controlled  outside 
of  the  time  of  his  employment.  Employers  no  doubt 
do  not  realize  what  they  are  doing.  If  they  demand 
total  abstinence  outside  of  working  hours  on  the  part 
of  men  who  enjoy  alcoholic  drink  and  are  accustomed 
to  its  use,  they  will  either  drive  them  to  secret  indulg- 
ence with  all  its  degrading  influences  or  will  deprive 
them  of  a  useful  and  harmless  pleasure  and  wholesome 
indulgence  and  thus  materially  diminish  their  mental 
and  physical  buoyancy  and  hence  their  efficiency  dur- 
ing working  hours.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  employ 
only  total  abstainers,  they  will  winnow  out  from  a 
generally  healthy  population  the  abnormal  and  de- 
fective natures  and  thus  secure  inferior  material  for 
their  employ.  For  intolerance  for  alcohol  is  a  mark 
of  degeneracy,  and  abstinence  not  based  on  actual  in- 
tolerance of  alcohol  argues  lack  of  moral  control  or 
lack  of  capacity  to  enjoy,  either  of  which  indicates 
a  weaker  and  inferior  nature  than  the  normal. 

Southern  Prohibition  is  Class  Legislation. 

The  character  of  the  anti-saloon  movement  as  a 
fight  of  the  "classes  against  the  masses"  receives  fur- 

141 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much:' 

ther  illustration  from  the  laws  of  the  two  most  recent 
accessions  to  the  ranks  of  prohibition  states. 

In  Georgia,  where  the  prohibition  law  goes  into 
effect  January  i,  not  the  slightest  pretense  is  made 
that  the  law  is  intended  to  interfere  with  the  use  of 
alcoholic  drink  in  private  residences.  The  existing 
social  clubs  of  Atlanta,  moreover,  have  entered  into 
an  agreement  to  introduce  the  locker  system.  Each 
member  may  have  a  locker  and  may  stock  it  with 
liquor  according  to  his  wishes,  the  club  paying  a 
license  of  $500  to  the  state.  He  may  use  these  liquors 
for  himself,  and  of  course  may  entertain  friends. 
Probably  it  will  be  as  in  other  clubs  where  the  system 
prevails.  Liquor  will  be  free  to  everybody  who  can 
afford  to  buy  it  by  the  gallon,  the  bottle  or  the  case. 
He  need  not  serve  himself,  but  can  have  it  served 
by  club  attendants  from  his  own  locker,  and  if  he  is 
not  there,  he  can  authorize  his  friends  to  sign  his  name 
so  that  they  can  use  his  locker.  Besides,  what  is  to 
prevent  one  member  from  lending  his  bottle  to  another 
who  has  not  been  forehanded  enough  to  keep  his  locker 
properly  stocked? 

Fourteen  locker  club  licenses  have  been  issued  in 
Savannah. 

The  Alabama  prohibition  law  contains  this  para- 
graph : 

Sec.  12. — That  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  not  prohibit 
the  social  serving  of  liquors  and  beverages  mentioned  in 
this  act  in  private  residences  in  ordinary  social  intercourse. 

In  addition,  a  bill  has  been  passed  exempting  from 
the  operation  of  the  prohibition  law  the  existing  social 
clubs. 

And  in  the  face  of  this  barefaced  class  legislation, 
intended  to  deprive  the  negro  and  the  "white  trash" 
of  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink  while  preserving  the  right 
of  the  well-to-do  to  indulge  as  heretofore,  we  are  told 

142 


Whole  sameness  of  Alcoholic  Drink. 

by  people  who  pretend  merely  to  publish  "facts,"  that 
the  prohibition  movement  in  the  south  is  genuine  and 
that  the  white  man  is  willing  to  forego  the  indulgence 
in  drink  for  the  benefit  of  his  poor  black  brother ! 

Well,  the  South  shall  lie  on  the  bed  of  its  own 
making.  Already  travelers  tell  us,  the  cocaine  habit 
is  spreading  alarmingly  among  the  negroes,  as  it  has 
done  in  all  prohibition  states  and  districts. 

The  Usefulness  and  Wholesomeness  of  Alcoholic 
Drink  Must  be  Shown  to  the  Public. 

Evidence  continues  to  multiply  that  it  is  necessary 
for  the  brewers  to  take  up  the  defense  of  their  business 
not  in  the  sense  of  apologizing  for  a  necessary  evil, 
but  by  bringing  out  the  usefulness  and  wholesomeness 
of  the  temperate  use  of  beer.  Although  much  has 
been  said  in  the  daily  papers  during  the  past  month 
in  commendation  of  the  stand  taken  by  the  brewers 
in  favor  of  cleaning  up  the  retail  business,  still  the 
general  tone  of  the  editorial  remarks  shows  that  the 
writers  are  not  familiar  with  the  positive  aspects  of 
the  problem,  but  only  with  some  of  the  negative  ones, 
they  deal  with  the  use  of  liquor  as  an  ineradicable 
practice,  but  nowhere  recognize  its  necessary,  useful 
and  wholesome  features. 

Here  is  a  characteristic  utterance  from  an  editorial 
in  the  Rockford  (111.)  Star  of  December  8,  1907: 

What  then  is  the  definition  of  this  thoroughly  organized 
and  popularly  backed  agitation  to  put  the  saloon  out  of 
business?  Is  it  not  that  the  great  masses  have  come  to 
realize  that  the  dramshop  has  produced  no  good  and  that 
only  an  endless  string  of  ills  come  from  it?  Have  they 
not  concluded  that  a  business  ivhich  serves  no  useful  pur- 
pose and  whose  aptest  champion  can  not  give  it  credit  for  an 
atom  of  wholesomeness ,  should  no  longer  be  controlled  or 
restricted  but  wiped  out  altogether? 

143 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

The  words  to  which  I  want  to  call  atte'urm  nave 
been  italicized. 

Now,  that  is  precisely  the  point  on  which  I  have 
been  harping  for  the  last  three  years  in  these  columns. 
It  is  this  oblique  moral  view  of  the  whole  liquor  prob- 
lem that  we  must  correct.  The  social  settlement 
workers  blame  the  anti-drink  "fans"  because  they 
w!ant  to  abolish  the  saloons  without  offering  to  put 
anything  in  its  place  to  answer  the  social  needs  of  the 
massess.  Are  we  not  guilty  of  a  similar  omission  on 
our  side,  if  we  neglect  to  furnish  the  positive  argu- 
ment, showing  that  we  do  not  apologize  in  a  merely 
negative  way  for  the  saloon  as  a  necessary  evil,  but 
insisting  upon  and  explaining  the  positive  uses  of 
alcoholic  beverages  as  supplying  what  is  and  always 
has  been  a  cultural  need? 

We  are  in  a  position  to  controvert  the  statement 
of  the  Rockford  Star  that  the  business  serves  no  use- 
ful purpose  and  that  its  aptest  champion  cannot  give 
it  credit  for  an  atom  of  wholesomeness.  A  study  of 
the  drink  question  will  readily  convince  any  open- 
minded  person  that  the  contrary  is  true,  that  a  great 
deal  can  be  and  has  been  said  by  the  champions  of 
the  temperate  use  of  alcoholic  drink  and  of  the  saloon, 
which  does  show  its  usefulness  and  wholesomeness, 
aye,  its  necessity,  for  the  widest  cultural  development, 
and  that  an  overwhelming  preponderance  of  scientific 
evidence,  moral  philosophy  and  sociological  study 
strongly  favors  the  use  of  alcoholic  drink. 

But  this  material  has  been  allowed  to  be  on  the  shelf, 
or.  at  least,  has  been  discussed  within  the  ranks  of 
those  already  convinced,  if  not  informed,  of  the  pro- 
priety of  the  business  in  which  they  are  engaged.  Is 
it  not  time  this  knowledge  were  scattered  broadcast 
among  the  people  ? 

144 


BILLY  J.  CLARK,  founder  of  the  first  temperance  society  in  the  United 
(After  a  print  in    The  Defender.) 


Improve  the  Saloons. 

(February  i,  1908.) 
The  Saloon  Should  Not  be  Abolished  but  Improved. 

I  have  not  heretofore  devoted  any  space  to  the 
editorials  that  have  lately  appeared  in  Collier's  on  the 
subject  of  the  saloon  and  the  work  of  the  anti-saloon 
league.  On  the  whole,  these  editorials  could  not  have 
been  discussed  without  pulling  them  to  pieces  entirely. 
There  is  one,  however,  in  the  issue  of  January  18, 
which  contains  not  more  than  two  or  three  statements 
that  are  out  of  harmony  with  the  facts  or  conclusions 
that  are  out  of  the  bounds  of  reason.  When  the 
amount  of  erroneous  statements  and  unwarranted  con- 
clusions is  reduced  so  far  that  it  can  be  sifted  out  it  is 
possible  and  proper  to  discuss  the  matter.  Here  is 
the  editorial  in  question : 

Notwithstanding  their  protest  that  prohibition  does  not 
hurt  their  business,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  Internal 
revenue  figures  show  increased  sales  of  malt  and  spirituous 
liquors  in  1907  over  19x36,  brewers,  distillers  and  wholesale 
liquor  dealers  are  girding  their  loins.  Never  before  has  any 
one  been  able  to  make  the  "liquor  interests"  stand  together 
on  anything,  but  common  danger  has  brought  about  common 
interest.  Brewer  and  distiller  are  shoulder  to  shoulder  to 
dispute  to  open  territory  left  to  them.  The  brewers  are 
especially  active,  and  the  brewers,  among  the  larger  inter- 
ests, are  mainly  responsible  for  the  degradation  of  the  Amer- 
ican saloon ;  the  small,  local  brewers ;  that  is,  not  the  big 
ones  who  ship  their  beer  far  away.  As  the  brewers  deal 
with  the  lighter  and  less  harmful  form  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages this  bad  leadership  or  influence  bears  the  look  of  para- 
dox. But  the  manufacturers  and  distributers  of  spirits,  mak- 
ing an  imperishable  and  comparatively  concentrated  product, 
are  in  only  distant  touch  with  the  saloon-keepers ;  while  the 
brewers,  with  their  bulky  and  perishable  goods,  must  main- 
tain close  touch.  This  contact  with  their  customers,  to- 
gether with  an  intemperate  race  for  business  among  brew- 
eries, has  begotten  a  system  to  which  many  of  the  in- 
creasing evils  of  the  saloon  business  are  due.  When  a  few 
years  ago  the  saloon-keepers  of  Chicago  made  a  declara- 

145 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

tioii  of  their  business,  as  required  by  state  law,  five  thou- 
sand out  of  eight  thousand  stated  that  they  were  "agents 
for  breweries."  It  is  the  consequent  degradation  which  has 
driven  "drinking"  men,  south  and  west,  to  vote  with  the 
Prohibitionists,  for  nothing  is  more  certain  about  this 
"Prohibition  wave"  than  that  it  acquires  its  great  strength 
not  from  pure  hatred  of  strong  drink,  but  from  hostility 
to  our  system  of  distribution — the  American  saloon. 

The  brewers  never  claim  that  prohibition  does  not 
hurt  their  business.  It  is  the  distillers,  and  in  their 
case  the  claim  may  be  true.  The  brewers,  on  the  con- 
trary, have  always  insisted  that  prohibition  and  strongly 
restrictive  legislation  works  to  cut  off  the  use  of  beer 
and  promote  the  use  of  spirits,  and  very  seriously 
handicaps  their  business. 

True,  Collier's  very  adroitly  puts  its  statement  in 
such  a  way  as  to  create  the  impression  that  the  brewers 
make  the  claim  that  prohibition  does  not  hurt  their 
business,  while  leaving  the  door  open  to  the  technical 
defense  that  this  was  not  intended  to  apply  specifically 
to  the  brewers.  Such  disingenuous  argument  is  quite 
in  line  with  what  we  commonly  meet  on  the  anti-drink 
side. 

But  even  as  to  the  distillers'  side  of  the  case,  while 
prohibition  does  not  reduce  their  business,  according 
to  good  authority  among  themselves,  it  is  nevertheless 
natural  that  they  should  oppose  prohibition.  And  I 
believe  they  do.  It  is  natural  that  the  distiller  should 
prefer  to  do  a  business  which  is  not  only  in  technical 
compliance  with  the  laws,  but  also  in  full  accord  with 
the  spirit  of  the  law  and  with  good  morals.  That  is 
quite  sufficient  reason  for  him  to  oppose  prohibition. 
The  distiller  is  as  good  a  citizen  as  any  other  business 
man  and  quite  as  much  interested  in  the  maintenance 
of  social  order. 

146 


Influences  Keeping  the  Dive. 

The  Brewer's  Responsibility  is  Only  Partial. 

It  is  not  true  that  the  brewer  is  "mainly  responsible 
for  the  degradation  of  the  American  saloon,  the  small 
local  brewer,  that  is,  not  the  big  ones  who  ship  their 
beer  far  away." 

As  to  any  difference  in  this  matter  between  the  local 
brewer  whom  every  one  in  town  knows  and  generally 
respects,  who  is  in  constant  touch  with  his  neighbors, 
who  is  always  solicited  for  contributions  for  any  public 
enterprise,  and  consulted  about  business  ventures,  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  shipping  brewer  who  has  no 
local  ties,  on  the  other — well,  if  there  is  any  difference 
it  is  more  likely  to  be  in  favor  of  the  local  brewer. 
But  I  do  not  believe  there  is  any  difference. 

However,  that  is  immaterial.  The  main  point  is 
that  the  brewer  is  not  mainly  responsible  for  the  deg- 
radation of  the  saloon.  If  he  were,  the  saloon  should 
have  become  worse  as  the  control  of  breweries  over  it 
extended.  The  contrary  is  the  case.  The  saloon  of 
today  is  much  better  than  the  saloon  of  frontier  days. 
Every  one  in  Chicago  knows  that  the  saloons  here  are 
much  better  now  than  they  were  twenty  years  ago. 
The  general  advance  in  culture  naturally  effects  an 
uplift  all  along  the  line,  whether  it  is  street  cars,  office 
buildings,  street  pavements,  the  regulation  of  the 
learned  professions,  the  character  of  public  officials, 
or  the  operation  of  saloons. 

Other  Influences  Tending  to  Keep  the  Disorderly 
Saloon  Alive. 

There  has  been  great  advance  in  temperance  in  the 
last  fifty  years,  the  efforts  of  the  militiant  total-ab- 
stainers to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 

There  are  two  other  influences  that  have  much  to 
do  with  preventing  the  complete  cleaning  up  of  the 
retail  liquor  trade.  One  is  the  fact  that  the  unreason- 

147 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

ing  agitation  against  the  business  and  the  social  stigma 
which  has  come  to  attach  to  it  to  an  extent,  have 
served  to  drive  out  and  keep  out  some  persons  of  char- 
acter whose  places  have  been  taken  by  persons  of  in- 
ferior character,  thus  leaving  in  the  business  a  small 
minority  of  disorderly  saloons.  The  other  influence 
is  the  desire  of  the  low  politician  to  keep  disorderly 
saloons  in  existence  for  purposes  of  "pull"  and  "graft." 

I  do  not  deny  the  "intemperate  race  for  business 
among  breweries."  They  have  been  no  better  and  no 
worse  than  the  insurance  companies,  the  railroad  com- 
panies, the  packers,  and  many  others  who  have  not 
yet  incurred  the  wrath  of  the  public.  Did  any  one 
suggest,  the  abolition  of  packing  houses  on  account  of 
the  abuses  existing  in  them?  They  got  a  cleaning  up, 
and  the  big  ones  at  least  are  better  off  to-day  than 
before. 

Why,  then,  must  the  saloon  be  abolished?  Perhaps 
it  would  be  well  to  introduce  the  French  cafe  or  the 
German  tavern.  But  that  is  a  matter  of  evolution  of 
habits,  not  a  matter  of  law.  The  process  is  going  on 
now.  The  cafe,  the  resturant,  the  amusement  park, 
are  gradually  displacing  the  bar  room.  Concerted  ac- 
tion to  hasten  this  process  seems  at  present  out  of  the 
question  when  there  are  as  many  amateur  reformers 
denouncing  the  drinking  of  alcoholic  beverages  by 
women  in  public  as  there  are  those  who  denounce  their 
doing  it  at  home.  The  public,  and  especially  our  news- 
papers and  magazines,  will  have  to  do  a  great  deal  of 
studying  before  they  can  view  the  drink  question  as 
do  the  real  students  of  it,  among  whom  there  is  little 
dispute  as  to  the  tendencies  which  it  is  desirable  to 
develop.  Some  states  and  cities  prohibit  chairs  and 
tables  in  bar-rooms,  thus  hindering  the  rational  de- 
velopment of  temperance.  Some  favor  publicity  of 
drinking,  others  favor  privacy.  Some  shorten  the 

148 


Study  the  Drink  Question. 

hours  and  thus  promote  concentrated  drinking  of  con- 
centrated beverages.  Some  enforce  secrecy  and  thus 
encourage  the  bottle  as  against  the  schooner. 

The  Drink  Question  Must  be  Studied  Before  Legis- 
lation is  Enacted. 

While  this  chaos  of  laws  and  of  opinion  prevails, 
what  can  be  hoped  of  legislation  ?  Before  we  can  have 
rational  legislation  we  must  have  study.  No  law  was 
ever  passed  in  the  United  States  in  regard  to  the 
liquor  traffic,  except  the  Federal  tax  laws — and  they 
were  proposed  by  the  brewers  themselves — that  was 
based  on  exhaustive  study.  It  has  all  been  hap-hazard, 
hysterical,  slam-bang  legislation  without  knowledge  of 
the  facts  and,  for  the  most  part,  without  even  any 
desire  for  knowledge.  A  member  of  a  state  legislature 
once  said  to  me:  "We  do  not  deal  with  the  liquor 
traffic  in  the  scientific  way  you  do.  We  simply  go  on 
the  theory  of  hitting  it  whenever  we  get  a  chance." 

The  drink  question  has  an  anthropological  or  social 
side,  a  physiological,  a  moral,  a  political,  an  economic 
and  a  fiscal.  It  enters  into  almost  every  department  of 
life.  It  must  be  studied  from  all  sides.  Only  when 
that  is  done  can  we  hope  to  get  out  of  the  horrible 
mess  into  which  our  present  crazy-quilt  legislation  has 
brought  the  matter. 

Until  our  newspaper  and  magazine  writers,  our 
public  men  and  our  reformers  are  willing  to  study  the 
matter  thoroughly,  admitting  scientific  men  and  real 
students  of  the  drink  question,  brewers,  distillers, 
wholesalers  and  retailers  or  their  representatives,  into 
their  councils — as  is  done  when  any  other  business  is 
studied,  though  none  needs  it  so  much — and  the  people 
in  the  trade  are  given  credit  for  being  decent  and 
wanting  to  do  a  proper  business — until  that  time  comes, 
the  only  sane  thing  to  do  is  to  enforce  existing  laws. 

149 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

In  most  cases  they  are  adequate  at  least  to  maintain 
order,  if  honestly  enforced,  and  there  is  no  sense  in 
talking  about  the  abolition  of  the  saloon  until  some- 
thing else  is  offered  to  take  its  place.  Enforce  the  laws, 
and  you  will  have  the  support  of  the  brewers.  There 
may  be  a  black  sheep  here  and  there  among  them. 
There  is  in  every  trade.  But  speaking  for  the  brew- 
ing trade  as  a  whole,  they  want  the  laws  enforced. 
Their  motto  is  "not  strict  laws  liberally  enforced,  but 
liberal  laws  strictly  enforced." 

There  are  other  things  to  account  for  the  "prohibi- 
tion wave,"  however,  than  "hostility  to  our  system  of 
distribution — the  American  saloon."  One  is  politics. 
That  is  an  important  influence  in  the  South.  Vide 
Wm.  E.  Curtis  in  the  Chicago  Record-Herald  recently. 
Another  is  fanaticism,  fifty  years  of  total  abstinence 
agitation,  absolutely  unopposed  by  any  rational  temper- 
ance movement  like  that  which  was  killed  fifty  years 
ago  by  the  prohibitionists. 

The  General  Advance  in  Morals  and  Hygiene. 

The  main  thing,  however,  as  I  have  pointed  out  be- 
fore, is  the  gradual  progress  of  people  in  matters  of 
hygiene  and  morals,  which  progress  is  being  misdirect- 
ed by  the  militant  anti-alcoholist  in  the  line  of  his 
little  hobby,  which  really  covers  only  a  small,  almost 
insignificant  part  of  the  great  movement,  but  by  con- 
centrating attention  upon  itself  has  been  artificially 
magnified  and  made  to  work  for  intemperance  rather 
than  temperance,  as  I  have  before  shown  in  these 
columns.  With  progress  in  real  temperance  along  the 
whole  line,  chiefly  in  eating,  next  in  business — keep- 
ing the  chase  after  the  dollar  within  rational  bounds — 
then  in  the  selfish  pursuit  of  pleasure  at  the  cost  of 
real,  profound,  unselfish  joy,  the  shirking  of  burdens, 

ISO 


Moral  and  Hygienic  Progress. 

etc.,  etc.,  with  progress  of  temperance  in  these  things 
will  come  true  temperance  in  that  which  is  least  of 
them  in  importance,  although  among  the  most  salient — 
drink. 

Will  come?  Nay,  it  is  coming,  and  to  a  great  ex- 
tend, has  come.  Compare  the  drinking  habits  of  today 
with  those  of  fifty  years  ago,  when  it  was  good  form 
to  wind  up  a  dinner  party  under  the  table,  and  the 
saying  "drunk  as  a  lord"  described  a  real  condition! 
Or  even  twenty  years  ago,  when*  a  drummer  could  not 
do  business  without  plying  his  customers  liberally  with 
eating,  drinking  and  cigars ! 

When  your  boy  misbehaves,  correct  him.  Do  not 
kill  him. 

If  the  saloon  misbehaves,  correct  it,  do  not  abolish 
it.  It  fills  a  very  important  social  need  of  the  time  ac- 
cording to  the  unanimous  opinion  of  settlement  and 
charity  workers,  economists,  philanthropists  and  all 
who  have  sanely  examined  into  the  question. 

"Sane    and    Reasonable"    Methods    in    Prohibition 
Agitation. 

We  have  seen  much  in  the  papers  lately  about  the 
"sane  and  reasonable"  methods  by  which  recent  pro- 
hibition victories  were  won,  as  compared  to  the  hyster- 
ical agitation  which,  these  papers  say,  has  gone  out  of 
style. 

Well,  when  you  hear  of  some  of  these  methods 
they  seem  hardly  "sane  and  reasonable."  It  was  re- 
ported that  the  passage  of  the  prohibition  law  in  Ala- 
bama was  secured  by  a  swarm  of  women  taking  pos- 
session of  the  capitol  on  the  day  the  final  vote  was 
taken,  entering  the  floor  of  the  chamber,  surrounding 
each  legislator  who  was  not  in  favor  of  the  measure, 

151 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much/' 

and  cajoling,  praying,  crying,  kneeling,  wringing  their 
hands,  etc.,  until  the  men  were  coerced  to  vote  for  the 
bill. 

In  the  Delaware  campaign,  women  marched  bands 
of  children  through  the  streets,  broke  up  open  air  meet- 
ings of  the  anti-local  optionists  with  their  noise,  and 
finally,  when  the  respectable  voters  went  into  halls, 
those  bands  went  in  there  and  by  noise,  cat-calls,  etc., 
broke  up  those  meetings  also.  If  it  is  "sane  and 
reasonable"  thus  to  make  rowdies  of  the  children,  I 
must  confess  that  is  a  system  of  pedagogics  with  which 
I  am  not  familiar. 

Centennial  of  the  Beginning  of  the  Organized  Tem- 
perance Movement. 

(January  I,  1908.) 

The  present  turn  of  the  year  bears  more  than  or- 
dinary significance  for  the  American  brewer,  and  in 
more  senses  than  one. 

It  is  not  only  the  beginning  of  a  new  year,  but  the  be- 
ginning of  the  second  century  of  the  organized  temper- 
ance movement  in  America.  Mind  you,  I  say  temper- 
ance movement,  in  this  case,  not  anti-drink  movement. 
It  was  on  April  13,  1808,  that  Dr.  Billy  J.  Clark,  in  the 
town  of  Moreau  in  Saratoga  County,  N.  Y.,  started 
the  first  temperance  society  on  this  hemisphere  of  which 
we  have  any  record. 

This  movement  as  first  begun  was  a  temperance 
movement  in  the  true  sense  of  the  term.  The  mem- 
bers of  Clark's  society  pledged  themselves  to  abstain 
from  the  use  of  ardent  spirits  and  to  use  for  stimulat- 
ing beverages  beer  and  mild  wines. 
Success  of  the  Original  Temperance  Movement. 

For  nearly  half  a  century  the  temperance  movement 
continued  along  that  line,  and  its  success  was  marked. 
About  the  middle  of  last  century  the  total  abstainers 

152 


Opinions  of  Early  Statesmen. 

secured  control  of  the  movement,  and  first  turned  the 
pledge  into  one  of -total  abstinence  from  all  alcoholic 
beverages,  following  this  up  with  the  demand  for  the 
prohibition  of  them  by  law.  It  was  now  no  longer  a 
temperance  movement,  but  the  reverse,  and  the  old 
societies  broke  up  and  vanished.  In  place  of  a  move- 
ment which  had  materially  assisted  the  social  move- 
ment towards  temperance,  raising  the  American  people 
from  its  place  at  the  bottom  of  the  list  of  sober  na- 
tions into  the  very  front  rank  and  near  the  head  of 
the  list,  there  now  arose  a  movement  whose  practical 
tendency  and  effect  was  the  opposite,  constituting  a 
hindrance  to  the  further  development  of  temperance. 
From  that  time  forward,  temperance  increased  through 
the  operation  of  general  natural  causes  in  spite  of  the 
prohibition  movement. 

The  centennial  of  the  organization  of  the  first  Amer- 
ican temperance  society  is  an  event  of  importance 
to  the  brewing  trade.  It  is  appropriate,  therefore,  to 
publish  in  this  issue  a  picture  of  Dr.  Clark,  the  starter 
of  this  organized  movement. 

The     Fathers     of     the     Republic     Favored     Mild 
Fermented  Beverages. 

Clark  was  in  harmony  with  the  leading  men  of  his 
time,  the  founders  of  our  Republic,  in  promoting  the 
use  of  mild  fermented  beverages  as  the  surest  cure 
and  preventive  of  intemperance  in  drink.  That  is 
the  position  frequently  laid  down  in  the  proceedings 
and  publications  of  the  United  States  Brewers'  As- 
sociation for  many  years  past.  It  is  the  position  en- 
dorsed and  espoused  by  the  leading  students  of  the 
drink  problem  in  all  civilized  countries.  It  is  the 
position  carried  through  with  almost  startling  success 
by  the  Swiss  nation — a  laboratory  for  sociological  ex- 
periments that  little  country  might  be  termed — whose 

153 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

brilliant  success  ought  to  be  applied  with  confidence 
by  the  more  populous  nations.  It  is,  finally,  the  posi- 
tion adopted  by  our  Congress  in  the  imposition  of  the 
Internal  Revenue  tax  system  which  has  led  to  the 
happiest  results  although  checked  and  hampered  by 
unreasonable  state  and  local  legislation  in  many  in- 
stances, the  distinction  between  mild  fermented  bever- 
ages and  ardent  spirits  being  obliterated  in  consequence 
of  the  irrational  attitude  of  the  anti-drink  fanatics. 

Clark  was  the  father  of  the  temperance  movement, 
rendered  abortive  by  the  militant  total  abstainer  and 
prohibitionist.  The  latter  have  no  right  to  claim  him 
as  the  father  of  their  movement.  His  child  was  a 
sturdy,  healthy  youngster,  for  which  a  changeling  has 
been  substituted.  Had  the  ideas  of  Clark,  Rush, 
Jefferson,  Hamilton — the  two  latter  agreed  on  this 
point — continued  to  prevail,  we  should  today  have  no 
liquor  problem  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  trouble  any 
one. 

Brewers'  Position  Same  as  that  of  the  Early  States- 
men. 

What's  the  use  of  crying  over  spilled  milk? 

A  great  deal!  In  these  days  when  the  brewer  is 
pictured  to  the  public  as  artfully  concealing  under  his 
ample  clothes  the  cloven  hoof  and  long  tail  of  the 
prince  of  darkness,  when  the  mashing  tool  is  repre- 
sented as  the  pitchfork  with  which  the  souls  of  his 
victims  are  thrust  into  the  torments  of  everlasting  fire, 
when  the  joyful  strains  of  the  orchestra  in  our  cafes 
are  denounced  as  the  call  of  the  siren  to  eternal  dam- 
nation, when  the  refreshing  drink  which  the  poor  man 
sips  in  the  saloon  where  saw-dust  or  white  sand  covers 
the  floor  is  described  as  a  veritable  hell-broth  to  eat 
out  his  vitals  and  shut  him  out  from  everlasting  life — 
in  these  days  it  is  well  to  pause,  as  the  centennial  of 

154 


Brewers  Agree  with  Statesmen. 

the  organized  temperance  movement  approaches,  and 
to  call  to  mind  that  it  was  not  always  thus,  that  the 
fathers  of  this  country  thought  otherwise,  that  Jeffer- 
son held  that  no  nation  is  drunken  where  wine  is  cheap, 
that  Hamilton  desired  to  discriminate  by  taxation  in 
favor  of  beer  and  wine,  that  those  who  brought  light 
beer  to  America  were  acclaimed  as  the  saviors  of  the 
nation  from  drunkenness.  It  is  useful  to  point  out  to 
those  with  whom  we  talk,  that  all  this  beneficent  work 
had  well  nigh  been  made  abortive  by  the  intemperate 
demands  of  the  teetotalers  and  prohibitionists,  were  it 
not  for  the  fact  that  the  cause  had  already  gained  too 
much  headway  for  even  so  determined  a  foe  to  stop 
it. 

We  are  hero  worshipers  as  much  as  other  people. 
A  careful  reading  of  our  early  history  shows  that  it 
was  the  hero-worship  for  Washington  that  carried  the 
Federal  Constitution  through  and  created  this  Nation, 
and  we  have  put  haloes  about  the  heads  of  Washing- 
ton and  some  of  his  contemporaries.  Most  people  do 
not  know  how  those  men  felt  in  regard  to  the  use 
of  alcoholic  drink.  It  is  well  they  should  know  that 
the  greatest  Americans,  the  fathers  of  this  country, 
took  precisely  the  same  ground  which  the  United  States 
Brewers'  Association  has  proclaimed  for  decades  past. 
It  is  well  they  should  be  taught  that  those  men  stood 
for  temperance,  for  moderation.  And  if  they  were  to 
come  to  life  today  they  would  undoubtedly  take  the 
same  position. 

Here  are  a  few  lines  from  an  editoral  in  the  Mans- 
field, Ohio,  Shield,  of  Dec.  roth  last : 

Immoderate  use  of  liquor  wastes  substance,  dissipates 
fortunes,  brings  sufferings,  causes  crime,  bloodshed  and 
murder  and  often  destroys  its  victims,  body,  mind  and  soul. 

But  intemperance  of  many  other  forms  has  done  these 
same  things — an  hundred  fold  more.  Intemperance  in  drink 

155 


The  Rule  of  "Not  Too  Much." 

has  slain  its  thousands  and  its  hundreds  of  thousands,  but 
intemperance  in  thought,  word  and  deed  has  slain  its  mil- 
lions and  will  continue  to  do  so  until  many  zealots  learn  that 
the  only  temperance  that  counts  is  temperance  in  all  things. 

Resolve  to  Clean  up  the  Retail  Trade  and  Your 
Own  Business  Methods. 

The  past  year  has  been  full  of  events  that  should 
cause  the  brewer  to  stop,  at  this  turn  of  the  year,  and 
take  counsel  with  himself  and  with  his  fellows.  He 
has  been  entrained,  as  the  engineer  would  say,  in  the 
mad  rush  for  the  dollar,  together  with  so  many  others. 
He  has  not  always  considered  whither  he  was  drift- 
ing. He  has  thus  helped  to  supply  ammunition  to  his 
enemies.  He  has  in  some  respects  laid  himself  open 
to  just  critisicm. 

The  first  resolution  for  the  New  Year  should  be  to 
eliminate  all  the  objectionable  features  which  he  has 
allowed  to  grow  up  in  the  business,  as  far  as  lies  in 
his  power  to  do  so.  Of  that  subject  I  spoke  fully 
in  last  month's  issue  of  this  journal. 

Resolve  to  Enlighten  the  Public  as  to  the  Drink 
Question. 

But  he  also  has  sins  of  omission  to  reflect  upon,  sins 
against  himself.  He  has  allowed  fifty  years  to  go  by 
during  all  of  which  time  the  enemy  has  been  gaining 
strength.  He  has  allowed  the  intemperate  anti-drink 
"fans"  to  work  undisturbed  and  unopposed  upon  the 
public  mind,  to  dominate  pulpit,  press,  public  men,  until 
today  he  awakes  to  find  himself  environed  by  a  wall 
of  prejudice  almost  as  impregnable  as  it  is  unreason- 
able. 

The  second  resolution  for  the  New  Year  should  be 
to  enter  upon  a  vigorous,  comprehensive,  sagacious  and 

156 


Spread  the  Truth. 

far-reaching  policy  of  enlightening  the  public  mind,  of 
spreading  the  truth  among  the  masses  and  among  those 
who  form  public  opinion,  of  breaking  down  the  preju- 
dice now  existing  against  his  business,  with  the  ultim- 
ate purpose  of  securing  such  dealing  with  the  liquor 
problem  as  will  conform  with  science,  with  morals, 
with  economics,  with  the  highest  ideals  of  human  so- 
ciety. And  to  accomplish  this,  all  that  is  necessary  is 
to  carry  the  truth  which  he  knows,  among  the  people 
at  large. 

These  two  resolutions,  steadfastly  adhered  to,  are 
what  the  Growler  wishes  the  brewing  trade  of  Amer- 
ica to  formulate  at  the  beginning  of  the  New  Year  and 
of  the  second  century  of  the  organized  temperance 
movement. 


157 


APPENDIX. 


The  Committee  of  Fifty. 

The  Committee  of  Fifty  for  the  Investigation  of  the  Liquor 
Problem  was  organized  in  1893.  Following  is  a  declaration 
of  its  intention. 

"This  Committee,  made  up  of  persons  representing  differ- 
ent trades,  occupations,  and  opinions,  is  engaged  in  the 
study  of  the  Liquor  Problem,  in  the  hope  of  securing  a 
body  of  facts  which  may  serve  as  a  basis  for  intelligent 
public  and  private  action.  It  is  the  purpose  of  the  Commit- 
tee to  collect  and  collate  impartially  all  accessible  facts  which 
bear  upon  the  problem,  and  it  is  their  hope  to  secure  for 
the  evidence  thus  accumulated  a  measure  of  confidence  on 
the  part  of  the  community  which  is  not  accorded  to  per- 
sonal statements." 

This  plan  was  carried  out  with  the  assistance  of  experi- 
enced workers. 

The  Committee  has  published  the  following  books: 

1.  The    Physiological    Aspects    of    the    Liquor    Problem. 
Investigations    made    by    Prof.    W.    O.    ATWATER,    Wesleyan 
University;  JOHN  S.  BILLINGS,  Astor  Library;  Prof.  H.  P. 
BOWDITCH,    Harvard    Medical    School ;    Prof.    R.    H.    CHIT- 
TENDEN,    Sheffield    Scientific    School    (Yale) ;    Dr.    W.    H. 
WELCH,  Johns  Hopkins  Hospital. 

2.  The  Liquor  Problem  in  its  Legislative  Aspects.     An 
investigation    made    under    the    direction    of    CHARLES   W. 
ELIOT,  President  of  Harvard  University;  SETH  Low,  former 
President  of  Columbia  University;  Hon.  JAMES  C.  CARTER, 
of  New  York. 

3.  Economic  Aspects  of  the  Liquor  Problem.    An  investi- 
gation made  under  the  direction  of  Prof.  HENRY  W.  FAR- 
NAM,  of  Yale  University,  by  JOHN  KOREN,  with  the  co-oper- 
ation of  the  representatives  of  thirty-three  charity  organiza- 
tion societies,  sixty  alms  houses,  and  seventeen  prisons  and 
reformatories. 

4.  Substitutes  for  the  Saloon.    An  investigation  made  un- 
der the  direction  of  Prof.  FRANCIS  G.  PEABODY,  of  Harvard 
University;    Dr.   ELGIN    R.    L.    GOULD,   of   New   York;   and 
Prof.  W.  M.  SLOANE,  of  Columbia  University,  by  RAYMOND 
CALKINS,  with  the  co-operation  of  many  teachers,  students, 
settlement  workers,  and  other  investigators. 

158 


5.  The  Liquor  Problem.  A  summary  of  investigations 
conducted  by  the  Committee  of  Fifty  1893-19x53.  Prepared 
for  the  Committee  by  JOHN  S.  BILLINGS,  CHARLES  W.  ELIOT, 
HENRY  W.  FARNAM,  JACOB  L.  GREENE,  and  FRANCIS  G. 
PEABODY. 

These  books  have  been  published  by  Houghton,  Mifflin  & 
Co.  They  embody  practically  the  only  sane  examination  of 
the  liquor  problem  ever  made  in  America,  and  while  in- 
complete, if  one  expects  a  study  of  the  alcohol  question  from 
all  points  of  view — some  important  points  being  omitted; 
while  giving  no  conclusions  from  a  survey  of  the  subject 
in  its  entirety;  while  suggesting,  on  the  part  of  some  of 
the  agents  employed  to  collect  material,  decided,  although 
unconscious,  bias  against  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages; 
while  indicating,  on  the  part  of  the  scientific  observers,  ex- 
treme caution  in  the  statement  of  conclusions;  while  almost 
wholly  ignoring  the  highly  important  psychical  elements  in- 
volved in  the  problem,  owing,  probably,  to  the  fact  that 
the  investigations  concerning  the  ethical  aspects  of  the  liquor 
problem  remained  unfinished  in  consequence  of  the  death 
of  Col.  Jacob  L.  Greene,  of  Hartford,  Conn.,  who  had  that 
branch  of  the  inquiry  in  charge — notwithstanding  these 
shortcomings  these  books  must  be  recommended  to  every 
earnest  student  of  the  liquor  problem,  and,  in  fact,  it  is 
a  safe  statement  that  a  study  of  the  problem  cannot  be 
made  without  them.  Bearing  in  mind  the  criticisms  above 
made,  these  books  are  safe  as  far  as  the  statements  of  facts 
are  concerned,  which  is  of  the  greatest  importance  to  the 
student,  since  the  publications  of  the  anti-alcoholists,  on  the 
contrary,  are  so  patently  and  lamentably  deficient  in  that 
respect. 

The  Committee  of  Fifty  consisted  of  the  following  gen- 
tlemen : 

Prof.  Felix  Adler,  New  York,  N.  Y. 
Bishop    Edw.  G.  Andrews,   D.   D.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 
Prof.    W.    O.    Atwater,    Wesleyan    University,    Middletown, 

Conn.   (Lately  deceased.) 

Dr.  J.  S.  Billings,  Astor  Library,  New  York,  N.  Y. 
Hon.  Charles  J.  Bonaparte,   Secretary  of  the  Navy,  Wash- 
ington, D.  C. 
Prof.    H.    P.    Bowditch,    Harvard    Medical    School,    Boston, 

Mass. 

Rev.  Prof.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 
Z.  R.  Brockway,  State  Reformatory,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 
John  Graham  Brooks,  Cambridge,  Mass. 
159 


Hon.  James  C.  Carter,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Prof.    R.    H.    Chittenden,    Sheffield    Scientific    School,    Ya 
University. 

Right  Rev.  Thomas  Conaty,  D.  D.,  Los  Angeles,  Cal. 

John  H.   Converse,   Philadelphia,   Pa. 

Wm.  Bayard  Cutting,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Rev.   S.  W.  Dike,  LL.  D.,  Auburndale,  Mass. 

Wm.  E.  Dodge,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Father  A.  P.  Doyle,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Charles    W.    Eliot,    LL.   D.,    President   Harvard    University, 
Cambridge,   Mass. 

Rev.  Father  Walter  Elliott,  Paulist  Fathers,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Prof.    Richard   T.    Ely,   University   of   Wisconsin,    Madison, 
Wis. 

Prof.  Henry  W.  Farnam,  Yale  University. 

Rt.  Rev.  T.  F.  Gailor,  D.  D.,   Bishop  of  Tennessee,  Mem- 
phis, Tenn. 

Daniel  C.  Gilman,  LL.  D.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Rev.  Washington  Gladden,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  Columbus,  O. 

Richard  W.  Gilder,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Dr.  E.  R.  L.  Gould,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Dr.  Edward  M.  Hartwell,  Boston,  Mass. 

Rev.  W.  R.  Huntington,  D.  D.,  Grace  Church,  New  York, 
N.  Y. 

Prof.  J.  F.  Jones,  Marietta,  O. 

Hon.    Seth   Low,  LL.   D.,   former   President  Columbia  Uni- 
versity, New  York,  N.  Y. 

James  MacAlister,  LL.  D.,  President  Drexel  Institute,  Phil- 
adelphia, Pa. 

Rt.  Rev.  Alexander  Mackay-Smith,  D.  D.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

Prof.  J.  J.  McCook,  Trinity  College,  Hartford,  Conn. 

Rev.  T.  T.  Munger,  D.  D.,  New  Haven,  Conn. 

Robert  C.  Ogden,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  Prof.  Francis  G.  Peabody,  D.  D.,  Harvard  University. 

Rt.  Rev.  H.  C.  Potter,  D.  D.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Rev.  W.  I.  Rainsford,  D.  D.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Jacob  H.  Schiff,  New  York,  N.  Y. 

Rev.   Prof.   C.   W.   Shields,   D.   D.,   Princeton. 

Prof.  W.  M.  Sloane,  Columbia  University,  New  York. 

Charles  Dudley  Warner,  Hartford,  Conn. 

Dr.  Wm.  H.  Welch,  Johns  Hopkins  Hospital,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Frederick  H.  Wines,  LL.  D.,   Springfield,   111. 

Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  A.  M.,  LL.  D.,  Clark  College,  Wor- 
cester, Mass. 

160 


07558 


